MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943193170 · doi:10.3390/w11050921

Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP) Assay Method for Anaerobic Digestion Research

2019· article· en· W2943193170 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiochemical engineeringComparabilityAnaerobic digestionStandardizationMethaneDigestion (alchemy)Computer scienceKey (lock)Process (computing)Environmental scienceEngineeringChemistryBiologyMathematicsChromatographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests are widely used for characterizing a substrate’s influence on the anaerobic digestion process. As of 2018, there continues to be a lack of standardization of units and techniques, which impacts the comparability and validity of BMP results. However, BMP methods continue to evolve, and key aspects are studied to further eliminate systematic errors. This paper aims to update these key aspects with the latest research progress both to introduce the importance of each variable to those new to BMP measurements and to show the complexity required to design an accurate BMP test.

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 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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.277 · 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