Bibliographic record
Abstract
A full scale-study was undertaken on anaerobic digestion of municipal wastewater sludge in Collingwood, Ontario to determine if improvements in biogas production, pathogen reduction and sludge quality were possible at 44°C versus conventional mesophilic digestion at 35°C. Two HRTs were to be tested (20 and 40 days), as well as series operation of the digestion process, with one or both digesters at 35°C and 44°C and employing equal HRT in each digester. Technical difficulties meant that only two of the single-stage trials at 20 days HRT were completed, at 35°C and 44°C. They showed no statistically significant difference in average gas production, at 1031 m3/d for 35°C and 1035 m3/d at 44°C. Sludge quality was improved at 44°C in terms of fecal coliform reduction, but was not statistically significantly different for other pathogens (fecal streptococcus, ' E.coli' and 'Salmonella'), nutrient content and dewaterability. Pathogen reduction ranged from 1.1 to 3.3 log reduction at 44°C and 1.0 to 2.5 log reduction at 35°C.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".