MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948062456 · doi:10.36456/waktu.v13i2.61

ARANG AKTIF AMPAS TEBU SEBAGAI MEDIA ADSORPSI UNTUK MENINGKATKAN KUALITAS AIR SUMUR GALI

2016· article· id· W2948062456 on OpenAlexaff
Indah Nur Hayati, Joko Sutrisno, Pungut Asmoro, Budi Prijo Sembodo

Bibliographic record

VenueWaktu · 2016
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini tentang pemanfaatan karbon aktif ampas tebu sebagai media adsorpsi untuk menurunkan kandungan zat besi dan kesadahan pada air sumur gali. Tujuan penelitian untuk menentukan suhu karbonasi dan konsentrasi CaCO yang paling optimum untuk pembuatan karbon aktif serta mengkaji efektifitasnya dalam menurunkan kadar logam Fe dan kesadahan. Penelitian ini terdiri atas dua tahap, tahap pertama menentukan kondisi optimum karbon aktif berdasarkan SNI 06-3730-1995 yang didasarkan pada suhu karbonasi dan konsentrasi CaCO3 tahap kedua penggunaan karbon aktif dalam penyerapan logam Fe dan kesadahan berdasarkan ketinggian media. Pengukuran kadar Fe3+ menggunakan spektrofotometer, sedangkan pengukuran kesadahan dengan menggunakan titrimeteri EDTA. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan konsentrasi CaCO3 5,5.10-5 M dan suhu karbonasi 3500C paling optimum untuk menghasilkan karbon aktif paling sesusai SNI 06-3730-1995. Serapan optimum pada waktu operasi 2 jam pada media karbonaktif ampas tebu dengan tinggi 60 cm dapat menurunkan Fe sebesar 88% dan kesadahan 60%. Kata Kunci : Adsorpsi, Ampas Tebu, Besi, Karbon Aktif, Kesadahan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaktuSame topicEngineering and Technology InnovationsFrench-language works237,207