MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621286616 · doi:10.1080/15422119.2017.1335214

Perspective and Roadmap of Energy-Efficient Desalination Integrated with Nanomaterials

2017· article· en· W2621286616 on OpenAlexaff
Pei Sean Goh, Ahmad Fauzi Ismail, Takeshi Matsuura

Bibliographic record

VenueSeparation and Purification Reviews · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsDesalinationCommercializationGeothermal desalinationWater desalinationEnvironmental scienceBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desalination is known to be one of the most sustainable solutions for water treatment to provide fresh water for many water-stressed communities and industrial sectors. As the integration of nanotechnology with desalination processes is most likely to dominate the future research attention and desalination market, this manuscript presents state-of-the-art review on the enabling of cutting edge desalination technology integrated with nanomaterials. The technological needs and future perspective, which include the challenges and opportunities of nano-enabled desalination processes are critically reviewed in this contribution. Recent developments and findings on the state-of-the-art nano-enabled desalination processes are discussed. Key issues such as scale-up, economic competitiveness, potential environmental impacts and energy consumption are also reviewed. This minireview aims to provide directions and guidelines to the desalination research community regarding the future outlook and roadmap of the application of nanotechnology in desalination processes at the bench scale and commercialization level.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeparation and Purification ReviewsSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207