MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339861068 · doi:10.2166/wst.2003.0401

Impact of temperature on performance, microbiological, and hydrodynamic aspects of UASB reactors treating municipal wastewater

2003· article· en· W2339861068 on OpenAlexafffund
K. S. Singh, T. Viraraghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemical oxygen demandWastewaterHydraulic retention timeSewage treatmentChemistryBioreactorPulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined the feasibility of treating municipal wastewater by a UASB system under low-temperature conditions. Two reactors were started-up at 20 degrees C and subsequently operated at temperatures of 32, 20, 15, 11, and 6 degrees C applying several hydraulic retention times (HRTs) ranging from 48 to 3 h during an operational period of approximately 900 days. Chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal efficiency ranged from 70 to 90% up to an HRT of 6 h and 11 degrees C. The performance of the reactor was not very satisfactory during 6 degrees C operation (average COD removal 40%). Sulfate reduction played an important role in COD reduction. Digital image analysis and scanning electron microscopic observations of sludge samples revealed aggregation of biomass in the form of irregular shaped granules (mean size ranged from 1.5 to 3.0 mm). The hydraulic regime in the reactor was impacted by the change in operating temperature. This study demonstrated that the UASB system could be applied successfully for pre-treatment/treatment of municipal wastewater under low-temperature conditions.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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