MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977660580

leaves of averrhoabilimbi as a superior low cost adsorbent for lead ii removal

2018· article· en· W2977660580 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linda BiawLeng Lim, Wadiah Abdul Wahid, Nur AfiqahHazirah Mohamad Zaidi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Science Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdsorptionExothermic reactionMaterials scienceAqueous solutionIonic strengthChemical engineeringBase (topology)Lead (geology)ChemistryOrganic chemistryMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Abstract Bilimbi leaves (BL) as a low-cost adsorbent were effectively used to remove leadPb(II) from aqueous solution in a batch adsorption experiment. The effects of multiple parameters such as pH, ionic strength and contact time were also thoroughly investigated and optimal experimental conditions were ascertained. Based on the isotherm studies on the adsorption of Pb(II) onto BL, the maximum adsorption capacity was found to be1597.63 mg/g. Kinetic studies implicated that the adsorption data were best designated by the pseudo second order and the adsorption process of Pb(II) was concluded to be exothermic and it occurred spontaneously from thermodynamic study. While, regeneration studyshowed that base treatment was able to regenerate and improve the adsorption capability of BL. Based on the overall data obtained in this study, BL proves to be a potential low-cost material and could be employed as low-cost alternatives in wastewater treatment for the removal ofPb(II). 2. Keywords: Adsorption;Bilimbi leaves;Heavy metals; Lead; Regeneration

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Science ResearchSame topicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalFrench-language works237,207