Comparison of Oxidants Used in Advanced Oxidation for Potable Reuse: Non-Target Analysis and Bioassays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Free chlorine (HOCl) and monochloramine (NH 2 Cl) are less-used oxidants than hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ) in ultraviolet advanced oxidation processes (UV-AOPs) but have garnered interest from the water reuse industry and scientific community because they can be more cost-effective than H 2 O 2 and provide a protective disinfectant residual. The destruction of organic compounds, creation of UV-AOP byproducts, and change in toxicity during UV-AOP with H 2 O 2, HOCl, NH 2 Cl, or ambient residual chloramine were evaluated in recycled wastewater by suspect and non-target screening as well as bioanalytical tests (bioassays). Ten compounds were identified in reverse osmosis (RO) permeate via suspect screening with removal near 100% by UV/H 2 O 2 and UV/HOCl, greater than decomposition by UV/NH 2 Cl and UV/ambient (∼60%), based on suspect screening mass spectrometry peak area. Non-target analysis based on organic features in mixed-mode cation exchange cartridge extracts indicated that UV/H 2 O 2 destroyed a similar or slightly greater fraction of organic compounds, formed fewer transformation products, and reduced the summed peak area of non-target features to the greatest extent. Fewer chlorinated byproducts were produced from the RO permeate treated by UV/H 2 O 2 than exposure to the chlorine-containing oxidants. Addition of NH 2 Cl to RO permeate resulted in a slight increase in the bioassay oxidative stress response but dropped below the response limit for all samples after UV-AOP for all oxidants.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".