State of Art and Perspectives in Catalytic Ozonation for Removal of Organic Pollutants in Water: Influence of Process and Operational Parameters
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of organic pollutants detected in water and wastewater is continuously increasing thus causing additional concerns about their impact on public and environmental health. Therefore, catalytic processes have gained interest as they can produce radicals able to degrade recalcitrant micropollutants. Specifically, catalytic ozonation has received considerable attention due to its ability to achieve advanced treatment performances at reduced ozone doses. This study surveys and summarizes the application of catalytic ozonation in water and wastewater treatment, paying attention to both homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysts. This review integrates bibliometric analysis using VOS viewer with systematic paper reviews, to obtain detailed summary tables where process and operational parameters relevant to catalytic ozonation are reported. New insights emerging from heterogeneous and homogenous catalytic ozonation applied to water and wastewater treatment for the removal of organic pollutants in water have emerged and are discussed in this paper. Finally, the activities of a variety of heterogeneous catalysts have been assessed using their chemical–physical parameters such as point of zero charge (PZC), pKa, and pH, which can determine the effect of the catalysts (positive or negative) on catalytic ozonation processes.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it