Variability estimation of urban wastewater biodegradable fractions by respirometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a methodology for assessing the variability of biodegradable chemical oxygen demand (COD) fractions in urban wastewaters. Thirteen raw wastewater samples from combined and separate sewers feeding the same plant were characterised, and two optimisation procedures were applied in order to evaluate the variability in biodegradable fractions and related kinetic parameters. Through an overall optimisation on all the samples, a unique kinetic parameter set was obtained with a three-substrate model including an adsorption stage. This method required\npowerful numerical treatment, but improved the identifiability problem compared to the usual sample-to-sample optimisation. The results showed that the fractionation of samples collected in the combined sewer was much more variable (standard deviation of 70% of the mean values) than the fractionation of the separate sewer samples, and the slowly biodegradable COD fraction was the most significant fraction (45% of the total COD on average). Because these\nsamples were collected under various rain conditions, the standard deviations obtained here on the combined sewer biodegradable fractions could be used as a first estimation of the variability of this type of sewer system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".