MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625279425 · doi:10.1080/17597269.2017.1336348

Nutrient removal and recovery from digestate: a review of the technology

2017· review· en· W2625279425 on OpenAlexaff
Evelyne Monfet, Geneviève Aubry, Antonio Avalos Ramírez

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofuels · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhosphorus and nutrient management
Canadian institutionsCentre National en Électrochimie et en Technologies EnvironnementalesCollège Shawinigan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigestateAnaerobic digestionProcess (computing)Environmental scienceWaste managementProcess engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digestate is a byproduct of anaerobic digestion, which can be considered waste or a product of potential use for the chemical industry or agriculture. In either case, the digestate must usually be treated prior to being disposed of or valorized. This review describes digestate processing technologies and their specific characteristics. Nutrient recovery and removal from digestate can be achieved through mechanical, physicochemical or biological processes. Available and potential digestate treatment techniques are presented. The complexities of the technologies available, legislation, the agronomical value of the digestate and the economic value of the process mean a decision support tool is required to help managers choose the best digestate processing technology. To ensure adequate analysis, the whole biomethanization project should be integrated in the use of these decision support tools. The objectives and limits of some of the currently available tools are analyzed at the end of this review.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations153
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiofuelsSame topicPhosphorus and nutrient managementFrench-language works237,207