MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030769667 · doi:10.2166/wst.2020.256

Process water recovery via forward osmosis: membrane and integrated process development

2020· article· en· W3030769667 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey T. Martin, Γεώργιος Κολλιόπουλος, Vladimiros G. Papangelakis

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForward osmosisEnergy consumptionOsmosisProcess engineeringVolumetric flow rateWastewaterReverse osmosisWork (physics)Process (computing)MembraneEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringChemistryEngineeringComputer scienceThermodynamicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work reports on efforts to develop an integrated continuous forward osmosis system for the recovery of water from wastewater streams, highlighting critical process parameters to minimize energy consumption. Forward osmosis experiments were performed using NaCl draw solutions of various concentrations and the intrinsic membrane parameters (water permeability, draw solution permeability, and structural parameter) were then determined via nonlinear regression using MATLAB. The experimental data was then used to validate a theoretical water flux model, which was subsequently applied to simulate the forward osmosis performance under different hydrodynamic conditions using both NaCl and TMA-CO2-H2O (TMA: trimethylamine) draw solutions. Analysis of the energy efficiency of the TMA-CO2 draw solution regeneration stage revealed that the draw solution flow rate has a significant impact on energy consumption. Also, increasing the feed flow rate was found to slightly enhance the water flux up to 2.5%, while having a negligible impact on the downstream regeneration process energy consumption.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207