MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

General Fate Model for Microconstituents in an Activated Sludge System

2017· article· en· W2803275453 on OpenAlexaff
Bahman Banihashemi, Ronald L. Droste

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Council of Professional EngineersUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivated sludgeEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringWastewater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nine laboratory-scale continuous flow porous-pot bioreactors, operating at various solids retention times (SRT) and hydraulic retention times, were used to simulate activated sludge systems, and to evaluate biodegradation kinetic models for the fate of 17α-ethinylestradiol (EE2), bisphenol-A (BPA), and triclosan (TCS) at the μg/L range. Mathematical models were applied to describe the degradation mechanism of selected microconstituents and the pseudo-second-order model was found to best fit the results when active microconstituent degraders (XC) were used (r2 = 0.99). The result of XC estimation showed that SRT plays an important role in formation of the biomass capable of degrading selected microconstituents. It is also observed that microconstituent degraders are naturally present in an activated sludge system, even at low SRTs; however, the concentration of XC is dependent on SRT. It seems that biodegradation studies should incorporate XC, and not mixed liquor suspended solids concentration, in their kinetic formulations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Environment ResearchSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207