Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste: a mass balance analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anaerobic digestion of two kinds of reconstituted municipal solid waste (MSW) was followed in laboratory scale experiments in order to obtain a carbon mass balance. Despite the complexity of the initial MSW matrix, triplicate reactors showed a reasonable level of reproducibility. Under water saturated conditions, recorded methane yields were important : 178 and 126 m3 of CH4/ton of dry waste I (mean French MSW composition) and II (compost replaced putrescibles), respectively. The carbon distribution at the end of the waste I degradation, without taking into account the carbon coming from the initial leachate, was : 30.7% ± 3.5% as mineralized fraction (TIC and CO2), 28.6% ± 2.8% as valorized fraction (CH4), 7.9% ± 2.5% as solubilized fraction (TOC) and 33.8% ± 3.8% as solid fraction. The carbon distribution for waste II was different : 22.7% ± 3.1% as mineralized fraction, 24.6% ± 1.1% as valorized fraction, 3.6% ± 2.0% as solubilized fraction and 49.1% ± 2.9% as solid fraction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".