MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947092128 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23533

Advancement in treatment of wastewater: Fate of emerging contaminants

2019· article· en· W2947092128 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Dipti Prakash Mohapatra, Deepak M. Kirpalani

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSewage treatmentWastewaterReuseEnvironmental scienceWetlandWater scarcityContaminationIndustrial wastewater treatmentEnvironmental planningWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringWater resourcesEcologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The scarcity of industrial and domestic use water has become an important issue as industrial operations and localized pollution have burgeoned over the last decade. Wastewater (WW) treatment for recycling and reuse is gaining importance as an alternate source of water supply to circumvent water shortages. Wastewater treatment requires thorough planning, design, construction, and management of treatment facilities in order to discharge the treated water to the aquatic environment or for recycling and reuse. One detrimental effect of growing populations and urbanization has been the release of many persistent emerging contaminants (ECs) to the environment, mainly detected in WW. The entry of these ECs to the aquatic environment through wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) may cause different ecological risks such as reproductive toxicity, endocrine disruption, and microbial resistance. The quantification of ECs (in ng or pg level) in complex matrices, such as WW samples recognized through non‐target screening approaches, has played a key role in the planning and design of water treatment facilities. The purpose of this review is to provide information about advancements in wastewater treatment technologies such as constructed wetland (CW) and advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) and the fate of emerging contaminants during these treatments. Further, this review also reports the ecological effects of these contaminants and their by‐products formed during various advanced WW treatment processes. The review also discusses advancements in different analytical techniques for the analysis of ECs in WW.

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)0.000
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations80
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsFrench-language works237,207