MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406219146 · doi:10.3390/su17020466

Microbial Fuel Cells for Power Generation by Treating Mine Tailings: Recent Advances and Emerging Trends

2025· article· en· W4406219146 on OpenAlexaff
Wenwen Cui, Samantha Espley, Weiguo Liang, Shunde Yin, Xiaoqiang Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Fuel Cells and Bioremediation
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsTailingsMicrobial fuel cellEnvironmental scienceFuel cellsWaste managementElectricity generationMining engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)Materials scienceMetallurgyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) have gained considerable attention in recent years due to their dual potential in waste treatment and clean energy production. In the field of mine tailings treatment, MFCs exhibit a unique advantage by integrating pollutant degradation with electricity generation, gradually emerging as a significant research focus. Based on 1321 relevant publications retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) from 2004 to 2024, this study employs bibliometric analysis to systematically explore the research status and future trends of MFCs in mine tailings treatment and power generation. The main research themes include (1) distinctive publication characteristics of MFC studies in the context of mine tailings treatment; (2) key information on leading countries, institutions, journals, and disciplines contributing to this field; and (3) a comprehensive summary of technological breakthroughs, emerging research hotspots, and future development directions of MFCs in mine tailings management. By thoroughly evaluating the existing body of research, this study provides valuable guidance for scholars new to the fields of MFCs and mine tailings treatment while offering insights into the technological advancements shaping the future of this domain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations16
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicMicrobial Fuel Cells and BioremediationFrench-language works237,207