MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013186329 · doi:10.1002/9781119434016.ch26

Sustainability and Energy Management in Facilities for Wastewater Treatment and Reuse

2020· other· en· W3013186329 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Sebastian, Pratik Kumar, Krishnamoorthy Hegde, Satinder Kaur Brar, Mausam Verma, Rao Y. Surampalli

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Fuel Cells and Bioremediation
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReuseSustainabilityWaste managementSewage treatmentWastewaterRenewable energyBiogasResource recoveryEnvironmental scienceEnergy recoveryEnvironmental economicsEngineeringEnergy (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continuous and exponential depletion of non-renewable resources has forced the water authorities to amend various water resource recovery facilities in search of building a more sustainable and energy-efficient approach. Due to a high organic content compared to drinking water sources, wastewater carries more potential for energy transformation and waste valorization. Conventional treatment approaches such as activated sludge processing, predominantly advance with a centralized form of water treatment method that follows linear treatment methodologies, not only incurring high operational and maintenance costs but also leaving less potential and space for implementing the sustainable and energy balance strategy. Hybrid treatment facilities such as hybrid vertical anaerobic biofilm reactors and microbial fuel cells follow a more integrated treatment approach that can deliver less waste (sludge) and accompany energy production (biogas, bioelectricity). However, the selection and management of facilities for sustainable wastewater treatment and reuse should be based on a future vision for waste valorization, sustainability and energy-saving requirements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicMicrobial Fuel Cells and BioremediationFrench-language works237,207