MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413270488 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.126985

Anaerobic co-digestion of wastewater sludge and food waste: A machine learning approach to process modeling and optimization

2025· article· en· W4413270488 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence and Decision Support Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnaerobic digestionFood wasteWastewaterWaste managementProcess (computing)Environmental scienceDigestion (alchemy)Anaerobic exerciseWaste treatmentSewage treatmentPulp and paper industryEngineeringChemistryComputer scienceEcologyMethaneBiologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the complex microbial interactions in anaerobic co-digestion (An-CoD), predicting process outcomes remains challenging. This study applies machine learning (ML) to model and optimize the co-digestion of wastewater sludge and food waste (FW). A generalized, transferable framework is developed that reflects real-world operational constraints by isolating the mixing ratio as the primary input variable under fixed digester conditions, an approach aligned with full-scale facility limitations. Unlike prior studies limited to data from single facilities, this model is trained on a diverse dataset compiled from multiple literature sources, enhancing its applicability across varying sludge and FW characteristics. Three ML models, random forest (RF), XGBoost, and artificial neural networks (ANN), were trained to predict methane yield and assess the influence of feedstock and operational parameters. Regularized ANN outperformed other models, reducing overfitting, and achieved an R 2 of 0.86 and NRMSE of 0.31. The trained model was then coupled with a global optimization algorithm (dual annealing) to identify mixing ratios that maximize methane yield based on feedstock properties. Optimization across seven candidate points, spanning a range of solid contents, revealed that methane yield scales with feedstock quality and process intensity. High-VS sludge and FW mixtures under mesophilic continuous operation yielded up to 510 mL/g VS, while inorganic-rich, low-VS sludge limited yields to ∼130 mL/g VS. Medium-quality mixtures reproduced experimental trends, exceeding 300 mL/g VS. Predicted yields ranged from 134 to 510 mL/g VS, with optimal mixing ratios varying from 0.99 % to 88 % VS across scenarios. • Anaerobic co-digestion process was modeled using machine learning. • Optimum mixing ratio in co-digestion varies with characteristics of the substrates. • The volatile to total solids ratio is a significant feature in anaerobic digestion modeling. • Optimization techniques showed potential in complementing experimental approaches.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.234 · 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