MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Production and Characterization of Foam in the Anoxic Zone of a Membrane‐Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal Process

2011· article· en· W2399059445 on OpenAlexaff
Eric R. Hall, Alessandro Monti, William W. Mohn

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnoxic watersPhosphorusBioreactorChemistryNitrogenOrganic matterMembraneVolatile suspended solidsPulp and paper industryEnvironmental chemistryChemical engineeringSuspended solidsEnvironmental engineeringWastewaterEnvironmental scienceBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pilot-scale membrane-enhanced biological phosphorus removal process accumulated substantial quantities of stable foam on the surface of the anoxic zone. The foam contained 4 to 6% dry matter, with specific nitrogen and phosphorus contents that were similar to those of the underlying anoxic zone mixed liquor. Kinetic studies demonstrated that the specific rate of phosphorus release from the foam was only 25 to 30% of that observed with mixed liquor from the aerobic zone. Molecular techniques demonstrated that the calculated similarity of the microbial communities in the foam and the underlying mixed liquor was approximately 80%, with two phylotypes (Gordonia amarae and Microthrix parvicella) being uniquely enriched in the foam and one phylotype (Epistylis sp.) more abundant in the underlying mixed liquor. The production of foam was demonstrated to be a consistent phenomenon that depended on the concentration of the suspended solids in the bioreactor.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Environment ResearchSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207