MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884044775 · doi:10.1002/ceat.201800184

Temperature Effects on Concentration Polarization Thickness in Thin‐Film Composite Reverse Osmosis Membranes

2018· article· en· W2884044775 on OpenAlexaff
Yasmine Baghdadi, Sabla Y. Alnouri, Takeshi Matsuura, Belal J. Abu Tarboush

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering & Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMembraneThin-film composite membraneReverse osmosisConcentration polarizationPolyamideForward osmosisOsmotic powerPressure-retarded osmosisChemical engineeringPermeationMaterials scienceComposite numberChromatographyChemistryComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Continuous research and development of reverse osmosis (RO) technologies has led to the production of membranes that are very effective with high salt rejection abilities. As temperature is one of the factors that affects salt rejection capabilities in membranes, this paper investigates the effect of temperature on the thickness of the concentration polarization layer (CPL) deposited on thin‐film composite seawater RO membranes. Two types of membranes were studied: those with ex situ macromolecules and those with in situ macromolecules. FilmTec's reverse osmosis system analysis design software was used to predict the variation of salt rejection and permeate flow rate with temperature. The impact of these variations on the thickness of the CPL was analyzed for different polyamide concentrations in the membrane.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering & TechnologySame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207