MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205438821 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2021-0306

Assessment of a wastewater stabilization pond system for removal of arsenic, iron, and ammonia from reverse osmosis water treatment plant residual wastewater

2021· article· en· W3205438821 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Harrison Bull, Ali Ekhlasi Nia, Mohsen Asadi, Kerry N. McPhedran

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWastewaterEnvironmental scienceArsenicReverse osmosisEffluentEnvironmental engineeringSewage treatmentEnvironmental chemistryWater treatmentAerationWaste managementPulp and paper industryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drinking water treatment plants (DWTPs) produce wastewaters with elevated concentrations of heavy metals, metalloids, ammonia, and other contaminants. These wastewaters require treatment via processes including wastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs). This study assessed the arsenic (As), iron (Fe), and ammonia (NH3) concentrations in a Saskatchewan DWTP WSP system of five sequential ponds. Drone imaging combined with flow and depth data was used to estimate retention times which increased from 7–9 to 8–10 days after the DWTP upgrade. Concentration trends showed Fe decreased from Pond 1 to 3 and increased in Ponds 3 and 5, while As decreased from Pond 1 to 5. Average effluent As concentrations of 10.6 µg/L were above the 5.0 µg/L guideline, while concentration guidelines for both Fe and NH3 were easily met post-upgrade in 2020. Several actions are recommended to ensure adequate WSP operation including dredging, aeration, and installing macrophytes capable of As uptake.

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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207