MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207038619 · doi:10.2166/wst.2022.024

Evaluation of process condition impact on copper and lead ions removal from water using goethite incorporated nanocomposite ultrafiltration adsorptive membranes

2022· article· en· W4207038619 on OpenAlexaff
Seyedeh-Soghra Hossaini-Zahed, Samaneh Khanlari, Omid Bakhtiari, Maryam Ahmadzadeh Tofighy, Soheil Hadadpour, Saeid Rajabzadeh, Pengfei Zhang, Hideto Matsuyama, Toraj Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersIran National Science Foundation
KeywordsResponse surface methodologyCopperUltrafiltration (renal)MembraneGoethiteMetal ions in aqueous solutionPolyacrylonitrileChemistryMetalFerrousInorganic chemistryChemical engineeringMaterials scienceAdsorptionChromatographyMetallurgyPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) adsorptive membrane incorporated with nanosize-goethite (α-FeO(OH)) hydrous metal oxide particles (GNPs), prepared with optimal flux and Cu(II) removal in the previous study, was used to evaluate the process parameter on the Cu(II) removal. Box-Behnken Design (BBD) based on the Response Surface Methodology (RSM) was employed to evaluate the impact of Cu(II) feed solution characteristics such as pH, initial concentration of metal ion, and transmembrane pressure (TMP) on copper removal efficiency. The outcomes indicated that the RSM optimization technique could be utilized as an applicable method to find the optimum condition for the maximum Cu(II) removal with slight variance compared with the experimentally measured data. The effect of each process parameter and the coupling effect of parameters on the Cu(II) removal was assessed. Finally, the optimum condition of pH, Cu(II) concentration, and transmembrane pressure (TMP) to obtain high copper removal efficiency was decided. In the optimum condition of the Cu(II) removal, the removal of lead (Pb(II)) metal ion was evaluated by the same membrane.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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