The Critical Role of Artificial Intelligence in Optimizing Electrochemical Processes for Water and Wastewater Remediation: A State-of-the-Art Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming electrochemical water and wastewater treatment by enhancing efficiency, predictive accuracy, and process control. However, a comprehensive evaluation of AI models in optimizing electrochemical processes for pollutant removal is still lacking. This review addresses this gap by systematically analyzing AI applications in electrocoagulation (EC), electrooxidation (EO), electro-Fenton (EF), and electrodialysis (ED). Focusing on key advances and parameter optimization, it highlights how AI-driven models improve removal efficiency by capturing complex nonlinear interactions among variables such as current density, pH, electrode material, electrolyte composition, and pollutant concentration. Recent studies have notably shown that artificial neural networks (ANNs) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference systems (ANFIS) have achieved R 2 values above 0.99 in EC and EO processes, outperforming traditional models. Hybrid AI approaches like ANN-GA and ANFIS-ACO have further optimized catalyst dosage and ion migration in EF and ED. While AI has demonstrated remarkable potential, challenges such as limited data availability, model interpretability, and real-world implementation remain significant obstacles. Integrating AI with mechanistic modeling and real-time monitoring may overcome these barriers and enable autonomous, energy-efficient treatment systems. This Perspective offers critical insights into current progress and future opportunities, underscoring the role of intelligent optimization in advancing sustainable and scalable electrochemical water treatment technologies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".