MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132960211

Distinguishing between Adsorption and Biodegradation of MIB and Geosmin in Operational Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) Filters

2023· dissertation· W7132960211 on OpenAlexafffund
Fiona Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and DesignUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsGeosminAdsorptionBiodegradationActivated carbonFilter (signal processing)Water treatmentDiffusionFiltration (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water treatment facilities commonly use granular activated carbon (GAC) filters to remove taste and odour (T&O) compounds, such as geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (MIB). However, filter exhaustion is challenging to predict due to the seasonal nature of T&O events. Thus, a tool is needed to qualify performance. Therefore, the φ parameter of the pore surface diffusion model (PSDM) was calculated from parallel minicolumn data to determine filter performance. Here, the biodegradative and adsorptive φ were measured using parallel biologically active and suppressed minicolumns, thus, distinguishing their relative contribution to the removal rate. When evaluated near GAC full-scale empty bed contact times, the average removal efficiency of MIB and geosmin were 53 ± 30% and 80 ± 14%, respectively. Additionally, based on principal component analysis, the full-scale conditions at the time of GAC collection significantly impact φ.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207