MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735959096 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2017.016

Organic matter capture by a high-rate inoculum-chemostat and MBBR system

2015· article· en· W2735959096 on OpenAlexaff
Hadi Abbasi, Charles Élysée, Marc‐André Labelle, Édith Laflamme, Alain Gadbois, Antoine Laporte, Peter Dold, Yves Comeau

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsCégep de Saint-LaurentWSP (Canada)EnviroSim (Canada)Polytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemostatHydraulic retention timeBioreactorWastewaterOrganic matterEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryMoving bed biofilm reactorVolumetric flow rateChemistryEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this study was to develop an innovative process to maximize the bio-transformation of colloidal and soluble biodegradable matter (CSB) into particulate matter (XB) for energy recovery via methane production. Two configurations were studied: (1) high-rate moving bed bioreactor (HR-MBBR) and (2) inoculum-chemostat (IC) system consisting of a very HR-MBBR inoculating a continuous flow stirred-tank reactor. The effect of hydraulic retention time (HRT), specific organic loading rate (SOLR), and dissolved oxygen (DO) level were determined using real wastewater at pilot scale. Results showed that in the HR-MBBR process, a very high CSB bio-transformation efficiency (90%) was obtained in a wide range of SOLRs (2.0 to 5.5 g CSB m−2 d−1) corresponding to an optimum HRT of 36 minutes. The IC process reached a maximum CSB bio-transformation efficiency of 77%, at SOLRs ranging from 22 to 30 g CSB m−2 d−1 at an HRT of 3.7 hours. The DO concentration in the HR-MBBR influenced the CSB bio-transformation ratio, while the HRT and the SOLR were the dominant factors influencing this ratio in the IC process. Based on these results, the IC process could be an interesting alternative to high-rate systems towards obtaining energy positive/efficient from water resource recovery facilities.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207