MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling Thermomechanical Pulp and Paper Activated Sludge Treatment Plants to Gain Insight to the Causes of Bulking

2010· article· en· W2421877179 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean‐Martin Brault, Yves Comeau, Paul Stuart

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivated sludgeEffluentPaper millPulp and paper industryPulp (tooth)Environmental scienceSewage treatmentSettlingWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Activated Sludge Model No. 1 was chosen as the basis for model development and was modified to take into account the specific characteristics of pulp and paper effluents. The model was incorporated to the GPS-X simulation environment (Hydromantis, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) to study operating deficiencies and nutrient transformations, particularly in relation to bulking. The results show that the process of ammonification is not significant at the studied mill and that the process of phosphatification (transformation of soluble organic phosphorus into orthophosphates) seems to be related to settling problems, as indicated by the sludge volume index. The phosphatification rate and the standard oxygen-transfer efficiency were found to decrease as the system entered a bulking state. Understanding the behavior of pulp and paper activated sludge can be improved by the incorporation of industry-specific processes and components to comprehensive models. These models then can be used to gain insight to the causes of bulking.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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