Low‐energy reverse osmosis membrane with high boron rejection by surface modification with a polysaccharide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present paper aims at producing a high‐performance low‐energy reverse osmosis membrane by modifying the polyamide layer with potassium persulphate, chitosan, and methacrylic acid and sodium hypochlorite treatment. A supramolecular assembly of chitosan was made on the polyamide layer with methacrylic acid to increase the permeate flux. The concentrations of chitosan and methacrylic acid were varied to investigate the best combination of treatment to achieve superior performance. The membrane treated with 1000 mg/L chitosan and 4 % methacrylic acid showed permeate water‐flux 3.2 times that of virgin TFC RO membrane with a ∼2 % decline in salt rejection and a boron rejection of 97.45 % at pH 10. This membrane demonstrated energy saving of 68.78 % as compared to virgin thin film composite reverse osmosis membrane. Membranes were tested for hydrophilicity by contact angle analysis, surface charge by zeta potential analysis, morphology evaluation by scanning electron microscope, surface features by atomic force microscope, and chemical structural changes by attenuated total reflectance infrared spectroscopy. Significant enhancement in membrane performance was observed by surface modification to achieve ultra‐low energy reverse osmosis process development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".