MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306304628 · doi:10.1149/1.3502442

Pulse Electrolysis in the Electro-Oxidation on the Ti/SnO<sub>2</sub>-Sb<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> Anode for Wastewater Treatment

2010· article· en· W2306304628 on OpenAlexaff
Qing Ni, Donald W. Kirk, Steven J. Thorpe

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicElectrochemical Analysis and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolysisAnodeWastewaterElectrolyteCurrent (fluid)ElectrodeMaterials scienceConstant currentSewage treatmentWork (physics)Polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysisEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringEnvironmental engineeringChemistryElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electro-oxidation is a potentially efficient method to remove organic compounds commonly found in municipal wastewater. Compared to the conventional treatment by microbial digestion, electro-oxidation can offer significant saving in capital equipment, land footprint and treatment time. However, one of the biggest challenges facing this technology is to reduce the energy consumption associated with treatment. This work investigated the possible use of square-wave current pulsing as an electrolysis technique to improve the current efficiency. The experiments evaluated the efficiencies of electro-oxidation in simulated and actual wastewater. Two electrolysis modes, constant current and pulsing, were compared. The results indicate that the overall efficiency was dependent only on the average current, and there was no significant difference between pulsing and steady state electrolysis. This result suggests further study of the mass-transport characteristics of the organic compounds at the electrode-electrolyte interface.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207