MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220820149 · doi:10.3390/membranes12030302

Evaluation of Nanofiltration Membranes for Pure Lactic Acid Permeability

2022· article· en· W4220820149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mayuki Cabrera-González, Amal El Gohary Ahmed, Khaled Maamo, M. K. Salem, Christian Jordan, Michael Harasek

Bibliographic record

VenueMembranes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsNanofiltrationPermeanceLactic acidMembraneChemistryFermentationYield (engineering)ChromatographyChemical engineeringBiochemistryPermeationMaterials scienceBacteriaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lactic acid (LA) is an organic acid produced by fermentation or chemical synthesis. It plays a crucial role in the pharmaceutical, food and plastic industries. In the fermentation of, for example, grass silage, LA and different compounds are produced. To purify lactic acid, researchers have tried to investigate membrane technology to achieve a high yield of lactic acid permeance. This study tested four commercially available nanofiltration membranes (NF270, MPF-36, Toray NF, and Alfa Laval NF). Nanofiltration experiments were performed to investigate the rejection levels of lactic acid from a binary solution by using distinct molecular weight cut off membranes. All of the experiments were conducted with a lab-scale cross-flow membrane unit. Different operating conditions (pH, temperature) were studied for each membrane; the optimal process condition was found at 25 °C and pH 2.8. With higher temperatures and pH, an increase in LA rejection was observed. The MPF-36 membrane shows the lowest lactic acid rejection yield of 7%, while NF270 has the highest rejection yield of 71% at 25 °C and pH 2.8. These results will be helpful in the future to understand both the interaction of lactic acid permeance through nanofiltration membranes and process scale-up.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMembranesSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207