MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956543718 · doi:10.11113/amst.v23n3.166

Fundamentals of RO Membrane Separation Process: Problems and Solutions

2019· article· en· W2956543718 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Membrane Science & Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReverse osmosisSeparation (statistics)MembraneCalculatorSimple (philosophy)Membrane technologyOsmosisSeparation processProcess (computing)Computer scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringChemistryChromatographyEpistemologyPhilosophyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is the intention of the authors to let the students understand the underlying principles of membrane separation processes by solving the problems numerically, in general. In particular, in this article problems and answers are presented for reverse osmosis (RO), one of the membrane separation processes driven by the transmembrane hydraulic pressure difference. The transport theories for RO were developed in early nineteen sixties, when the industrial membrane separation processes emerged. These problems are solved step by step using a simple calculator or Excel in computer.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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