MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297039016 · doi:10.1002/9781119820086.ch20

Removal of Selected Constituents

2022· other· en· W4297039016 on OpenAlexaff
John C. Crittenden, R. Rhodes Trussell, BCEEM David W. Hand, Kerry J. Howe, George Tchobanoglous, Bill Ward, James H. Borchardt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicArsenic contamination and mitigation
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPotassium permanganateChlorine dioxideLimeChemistryChlorineEnvironmental chemistryAerationManganeseWater softeningEnvironmental scienceChloramineWaste managementPulp and paper industrySofteningInorganic chemistryMaterials scienceEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water purveyors are continuously striving to provide their communities with potable water that is safe for human consumption and aesthetically acceptable. This chapter reviews what constitutes traditional, nontraditional, and emerging constituents. It discusses the removal of the most common of these nontraditional and emerging constituents, including arsenic, calcium, magnesium, nitrate, radionuclides, pharmaceutical and personal care products. Several different treatment methods have been used to remove iron and manganese from drinking water supplies, including oxidation using oxygen (aeration), chlorine, chlorine dioxide, potassium permanganate, or ozone followed by precipitate removal by sedimentation and filtration; ion exchange; lime softening; and sequestering chemicals. The chapter provides design considerations and performance information for each process.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArsenic contamination and mitigationFrench-language works237,207