MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DataSheet1_Performance of pitcher-type POU filters for the removal of 75 PFAS from drinking water: comparing different water sources.pdf

2024· dataset· en· W6946356710 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTap waterFiltration (mathematics)ContaminationTotal organic carbonWater treatmentFilter (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a comprehensive assessment of the performance of popular pitcher-type point-of-use (POU) water filters to remove PFAS contaminants from tap waters. The evaluated filters, Brita (Elite and Standard), ZeroWater, Aquagear, and ClearlyFiltered, were tested for their efficacy in removing 75 targeted PFAS, total organic carbon (TOC), total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sulfate from two Canadian tap waters with background Σ<sub>75</sub> PFAS concentrations of 13 and 56 ng/L. Overall, the performances of the filters varied depending on the structure of the filter media, the water source, and the specific contaminants present. ZeroWater was the top performer in the case of total PFAS removal. The volume-weighted average removal of total PFAS after 160 L of filtration using Saint-Donat tap water was 99% for ZeroWater, 99% for ClearlyFiltered, 77% for Aquagear, and 20% for Brita (Elite). In the case of Montreal tap water, which had different water characteristics and lower total PFAS levels, the volume-weighted average removal for PFAS was ≈100% for ZeroWater, 96% for ClearlyFiltered, 60% for Aquagear, 48% for Brita (Elite), and 38% for Brita (Standard). Both laboratory and home tests involving ZeroWater filters yielded similar high-performance results using Montreal tap water. Although ZeroWater exhibited high PFAS removal (99%) in Saint-Donat water, TDS and TOC desorption and a significant drop in pH were observed after 80 L, a phenomenon which was explained by the higher total concentration of anions in this water. In contrast, no desorption was observed in Montreal tap water for TDS and TOC due to the lower concentrations of anions. The Aquagear filter demonstrated an unusual increase in concentrations of sulfate after the initial 20 L, which needs further evaluation. This study discusses individual filter performance, the influence of tap water characteristics, and the potential to meet the new NSF guidelines, which provides valuable insights for consumers seeking to choose an appropriate easy-to-use water filtration system to ensure safe and clean drinking water in different regions.

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 categoriesScholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesOpen science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0080.008
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.204 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207