MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316468406 · doi:10.3390/en16020963

Reliable Tools to Forecast Sludge Settling Behavior: Empirical Modeling

2023· article· en· W4316468406 on OpenAlexaff
Reyhaneh Hasanzadeh, Javad Sayyad Amin, Behrooz Abbasi Souraki, Omid Mohammadzadeh, Sohrab Zendehboudi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlingClarifierMean squared errorRange (aeronautics)Empirical modellingStatisticsComputer scienceMathematicsSimulationEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In water- and wastewater-treatment processes, knowledge of sludge settlement behavior is a key requirement for proper design of a continuous clarifier or thickener. One of the most robust and practical tests to acquire information about rate of sedimentation is through execution of batch settling tests. In lieu of conducting a series of settling tests for various initial concentrations, it is promising and advantageous to develop simple predictive models to estimate the sludge settlement behavior for a wide range of operating conditions. These predictive mathematical model(s) also enhance the accuracy of outputs by eliminating measurement errors originated from graphical methods and visual observations. In the present study, two empirical models were proposed based on Vandermonde matrix (VM) characteristics as well as a Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) algorithm to predict temporal height of the supernatant–sludge interface. The novelty of our modeling approach is twofold: the proposed models in this study are more robust and simpler compared to other models in the literature, and the initial sludge concentration was considered as a key independent variable in addition to the more-customarily used settling time. The prediction performance of the VM-based model was better than the LM-based model considering the statistical parameters associated with the fitting of the experimental data including coefficient of determination (R2), root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). The values of R2, RMSE, and MAPE for the VM- and LM-based models were obtained at 0.997, 0.132, and 5.413% as well as 0.969, 0.107, and 6.433%, respectively. The proposed predictive models will be useful for determination of the sedimentation behavior at pilot- or industrial-scale applications of water treatment, when the experimental methods are not feasible, time is limited, or adequate laboratory infrastructure is not available.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207