MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322015692 · doi:10.2166/wst.2014.456

Modeling bioaugmentation with nitrifiers in membrane bioreactors

2014· article· en· W2322015692 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Mannucci, Giulio Munz, G. Mori, Jacek Mąkinia, Claudio Lubello, Jan A. Oleszkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsBioaugmentationBioreactorNitrificationSeedingActivated sludgeEnvironmental engineeringChemistryEnvironmental scienceSewage treatmentThermodynamicsEcologyBioremediation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bioaugmentation with nitrifiers was studied using two pilot-scale membrane bioreactors, with the purpose of assessing the suitability of state-of-the-art activated sludge models (ASMs) in predicting the efficiency of bioaugmentation as a function of operating conditions. It was demonstrated that the temperature difference between seeding and seeded reactors (ΔT) affects bioaugmentation efficiency. Experimental data were accurately predicted when ΔT was within a range of up to 10 °C at the higher range, and when the temperature was significantly lower in the seeded reactor compared to the seeding one, standard ASMs overestimated the efficiency of bioaugmentation. A modified ASM, capable of accurately representing the behavior of seeded nitrifying biomass in the presence of high ΔT, would require the inclusion of the effect of temperature time gradients on nitrifiers. A simple linear correlation between ΔT and the Arrhenius coefficient was proposed as a preliminary step.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207