Using Powdered Activated Carbon to Adsorb Cylindrospermopsin and Microcystin-LR and to Quench Hydrogen Peroxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Part 1 of this thesis evaluated the adsorption kinetics of low concentrations of cylindrospermopsin (CYN) and microcystin-LR (MC-LR) onto 4 powdered activated carbons (PAC) made from 3 materials (wood, coal, and coconut) using a binary-solute system. The second-order kinetic model best fitted the data, with wood-based PAC performing best. At 20 oC, 2-20 mg/L of wood-based PAC1 removed 45-93% of CYN and 36-81% of MC-LR from Plant A water. The rate of adsorption of CYN and MC-LR was lower in colder water, and CYN adsorption was more affected by natural organic matter than MC-LR adsorption. Part 2 investigated PAC's ability to quench hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). Coal-based PAC outperformed wood and coconut, with 50 mg/L of WPH reducing H2O2 concentration by 68% at pH 8 after 24 hours. The reaction was faster at pH 8 than at pH 6, requiring high amounts of PAC and long contact times for significant quenching.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".