Effect of Surface Modification with Electrospun Nanofibers on the Performance of an Ultrafiltration Membrane
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrospinning of nanofibrous mats to create new membranes has been widely investigated, however surface modification of commercial membranes by electrospinning of nanofiber layer has received limited attention. In this work, the surface of a commercial polyethersulfone (PES) ultrafiltration membrane was coated with electrospun polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) hydrophobic nanofibers (NFs) for different time periods, i.e., 25 min, 125 min, and 250 min., and the effect of coating on the filtration performance was investigated. The membranes were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), contact angle measurement and further subjected to pure water permeation experiments, as well as the filtration of Ottawa River Water (ORW) and various protein solutes. By a thorough statistical analysis, it was concluded that the coating with the electrospun nanofiber layer enhanced the pure water permeation (PWP) flux. However, the fouling of the composite nanofiber/PES membranes was more severe due to the compaction of the soft nanofiber layer and the entrapment of foulants in the spaces between nanofibers. The nanofiber mat did not impact the separation of protein solutes as the composite and base PES membranes had the same protein removals.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it