Ultrasonic pretreatment for anaerobic digestion of suspended and attached growth sludges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a proven technology for energy production from the stabilization and reduction of sewage waste. The AD and impact of ultrasonic pretreatment of four waste activated sludges (WASs) from conventional and three non-conventional municipal wastewater treatment plants were investigated. WAS from a conventional activated sludge (CAS) system, a rotating biological contactor (RBC), a lagoon, and a nitrifying moving-bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) were pretreated with ultrasonic energies of 800–6,550 kJ/kg total solids to illustrate the impact of sludge type and ultrasonic pretreatment on biogas production (BGP), solubilization, and digestion kinetics. The greatest increase in BGP over the control of pretreated sludge did not coincide consistently with greater sonication energy but occurred within a solubilization range of 2.9–7.4% degree of disintegration and are as follows: 5% ± 3 biogas increase for CAS, 12% ± 9 for lagoon, 15% ± 2 for nitrifying MBBR, and 20% ± 2 for RBC. The effect of sonication on digestion kinetics was inconclusive with the application of modified Gompertz, reaction curve, and first-order models to biogas production. These results illustrate the unique response of differing sludges to the same levels of sonication energies. This article has been made Open Access thanks to the kind support of CAWQ/ACQE (https://www.cawq.ca).
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".