MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249414815 · doi:10.1080/01919510590925220

Aqueous Pesticide Degradation by Ozonation and Ozone-Based Advanced Oxidation Processes: A Review (Part I)

2005· review· en· W4249414815 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOzone Science and Engineering · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced oxidation water treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOzoneHydrogen peroxideWastewaterDegradation (telecommunications)Environmental chemistryChemistryPollutantPesticideSewage treatmentEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pesticide pollution of surface water and groundwater has been recognized as a major problem in many countries because of their persistence in aquatic environment and potential adverse health effects. Among various water and wastewater treatment options, ozonation and ozone-based advanced oxidation processes, such as ozone/hydrogen peroxide, ozone/ultraviolet irradiation, and ozone/hydrogen peroxide/ultraviolet irradiation, are likely key technologies for degrading and detoxifying these pollutants in water and wastewater. In this paper, ozone-based treatment of four major groups of pesticides, namely carbamates, chlorophenoxy compounds, organochlorines, and organophosphates, are reviewed. Degree of pesticide degradation, reaction kinetics, identity and characteristics of degradation by-products and intermediates, and possible degradation pathways are covered and discussed.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.252 · 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