MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889499096 · doi:10.5539/esr.v8n1p12

Preparation of Biochars from Bio-Waste for Removing Pollutants from River Water

2018· article· en· W2889499096 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yiyu Wu, XU Xin-hua

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiocharPollutantPyrolysisPulp and paper industryAdsorptionRaw materialChemistryOrange (colour)Environmental scienceWastewaterBiomass (ecology)Environmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a low-cost adsorbent, biochar can be used as a great tool for water treatment. Instead of using expensive woody biomass for biochar production, this study aimed to investigate the feasibility of using biowaste such as sugarcane skins, orange peels, and peanut shells to produce biochars through pyrolysis at 700°C. The optimal time length, dosage, and temperature for water purification were explored afterwards in batch tests. The ammonia nitrogen (NH4+-N) removal efficiencies of sugarcane skin, orange peel, and peanut shells were 74.4%, 96.3% and 90.8%, respectively, and the simultaneous permanganate index removal efficiencies were 26.6%, 31.0% and 26.6%, respectively. There was no significant difference in NH4+-N and permanganate index removal efficiencies when the dosage of three kinds of biochars was higher than 1.0 g/100 ml water. Greater adsorption capacity of biochars was observed for pollutants when temperature was increased from 10 to 30°C. These results confirmed our assumption that biowaste could make for good raw materials in producing biochars.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science ResearchSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207