MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795622325 · doi:10.11159/awspt18.127

Optimization of High Rate DAF Process for Removal of Algae in WaterTreatment Plant

2018· article· en· W2795622325 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Woosik Jung, Hyun Je Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaMinistry of Environment
KeywordsAlgaeProcess (computing)Water treatmentProcess engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceBotanyBiologyEngineeringEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years there have been large increases in the hydraulic loading rates used to design dissolved air flotation (DAF) facilities for drinking water applications.High rate DAF processes are now available at loading rates of 20 to 40 m3/m2•h.This research evaluated dissolved air flotation as a separation method for algae and organic compounds from water treatment plants.During the service period of 2016. 5. to 2017.6., DAF pilot plants (500 m3/day) process has shown a constantly sound performance for the treatment of raw water, yielding a significantly low level of turbidity (DAF treated water, 0.21 ~ 1.56 NTU).As a result of analyzing the algae cell counts in the influent source, it was expressed at 100-120 cells/mL.In DAF treated water, the removal efficient of algae cell counts was found to be up to 90%.The stable turbidity and algae removal were confirmed by operating the high rate DAF process under the condition of the surface loading rate of 30 m3/m2•hr.The number of algae in the DAF treated water has been analyzed to be less than 100 cells/mL.These results indicated that the DAF process is effective in removing the algae.

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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207