MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W384739703 · doi:10.1520/stp10260s

Combining Remediation Techniques Increases Kinetics for Removal of Persistent Organic Contaminants from Soil

2000· book-chapter· en· W384739703 on OpenAlexaff
X-D Huang, B. R. Glick, BM Greenberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrokinetic Soil Remediation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental remediationEnvironmental chemistrySoil remediationContaminationEnvironmental scienceWaste managementChemistryBiologyEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of techniques, both mechanical and biological, have been investigated for the remediation of persistent organic contaminants from soils. However, most of these techniques have been applied independently. As a consequence of using only one process, remediation usually is slow for persistent organic contaminants. To improve remediation, multiple techniques that complement different aspects of contaminant removal have been applied to soils in combination. This resulted in an enhanced multi-process phytoremediation system that improved and accelerated the overall remediation resulting in removal of 95% of total PAHs. The remediation system includes physical (volatilization), photochemical (photooxidation), microbial degradation and plant growth (phytoremediation) processes. The techniques applied to realize these processes are land fanning (aeration and light exposure), microbial remediation (introduction of contaminant degrading bacteria) and phytoremediation (plant growth with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria). This system was very effective at removal of persistent, strongly bound contaminants from soil. It appears that the combination of these components may be a viable solution for remediating persistent organic contaminants from soils.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrokinetic Soil Remediation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207