MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W968495960 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.r236-22

Honduran Imhoff Tanks: Potentials and Pitfalls

2010· article· en· W968495960 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anne M. Mikelonis, Ari Herrera, E. Eric Adams, Matthew Hodge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Pollution Remediation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An Imhoff tank is a structure originally designed to provide primary wastewater treatment. It is a sedimentation tank with a steeply sloped floor resting above a sludge digester. During the 1930s, Imhoff tanks represented 50 % of all waste-water treatment facilities in the United States. The majority of Imhoff tanks within the U.S. have since been abandoned or modified to adapt to changing treatment objectives and regulations. However, within the Central American country of Honduras they continue to represent a significant portion of the wastewater treatment infrastructure and are routinely designed and constructed where populations are small and terrain is limited. In Honduras, stormwater inflow and infiltration into wastewater treatment systems pose significant challenges. The drainage flows in urban areas mix with raw sewage creating dilute, but large volumes of, wastewater that requires treatment. Imhoff tanks in Honduras use design parameters more suitable for dryer regions of the world that do not experience such consequences of storm-water. These tanks are therefore currently not successful in providing treatment

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicHeavy Metal Pollution RemediationFrench-language works237,207