MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316766757 · doi:10.2202/1934-2659.1562

Nonlinear Modeling for the Degradation of Aqueous Azo Dyes by Combined Advanced Oxidation Processes Using Artificial Neural Networks

2011· article· en· W2316766757 on OpenAlexaff
Masroor Mohajerani, Mehrab Mehrvar, Farhad Ein‐Mozaffari

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Product and Process Modeling · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogen peroxideDegradation (telecommunications)Aqueous solutionFerrousOzoneChemistryChemical oxygen demandChemical engineeringMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryEnvironmental engineeringWastewaterEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One-hidden-layer artificial neural networks (ANNs) using a back-propagation structure have been trained on different sets of experimental data to identify and evaluate the degradation of different azo dyes (Reactive Yellow 84, Reactive Blue 19, Direct Red 23, Direct Red 28, and Acid Blue 193) by photo-Fenton process and combined ozonation and ultrasonolysis processes. Different input variables such as pH, initial concentrations of dyes and ozone, reaction time, ultrasonic power density, and initial concentrations of hydrogen peroxide and ferrous in aqueous solution were employed to model the degradation rates of azo dyes based on the decolorization efficiency and the removal rate using chemical oxygen demand (COD) and total organic carbon (TOC). A new model expression is developed to find the effect of individual parameters and their interactions on the efficiency of organic degradation by advanced oxidation processes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.277
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Product and Process ModelingSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207