MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001144608 · doi:10.3390/w12020323

Measurement and Modelling of Moisture Sorption Isotherm and Heat of Sorption of Fresh Feces

2020· article· en· W3001144608 on OpenAlexafffund
Claire Remington, Catherine Bourgault, Caetano C. Dorea

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Drying and Modeling
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of Victoria
FundersMitacsUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsFecesEnvironmental scienceDewateringSorptionBiosolidsFecal coliformSanitationWater contentMoistureWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringPulp and paper industryChemistryEnvironmental chemistryEcologyBiologyEngineeringWater quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The drying (or dewatering) of fresh feces and fecal sludge is a productive step in the management of sanitation, waste treatment, and resource recovery services. An improved understanding of fresh feces and fecal sludge drying would contribute to the development and deployment of fecal sludge management services. However, there is a lack of available literature on the fundamental drying characteristics of fresh feces. In response to this gap, this work shares experimental results for equilibrium moisture content of fresh feces at different water activity levels (aw) and proposes the use of the Guggenheim, Anderson, and de Boer (GAB) model for predicting aw, calculating the heat of sorption, and estimating the corresponding energy requirements for drying of fresh feces. This is the first time this work has been done with fresh feces. The total heat of evaporation was significant up to a moisture content of about 0.2 kg water per kg dry solids. In addition to informing drying process design, the sorption isotherm can be used to predict microbial activity, which could improve the management of feces and fecal sludge from a public health perspective. These data in turn will be used to promote access to dignified, safe, and sustainable sanitation.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.122 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicFood Drying and ModelingFrench-language works237,207