The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Machine Learning Models for PFAS Tracking, Detection and Remediation: A Review
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are known for their persistence, toxicity, and potential to cause harm to human health and the environment. Traditional monitoring methods are often expensive and time-consuming. The paper provides a review of existing machine learning (ML) models for PFAS detection and treatment processes. The paper also highlights a ML workflow process for PFAS detection, remediation technologies, and the need for unified open-source database for PFAS assessment in water.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“and the application of these techniques to the PFAS problem has already started to appear in the scientific literature (197–199).”
From Toward the development of a molecular toolkit for the microbial remediation of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (2024) · cites this paper as [198]
Citations
Cites
A Never-Ending Story of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs)?
Wang, Z., DeWitt, J. C., Higgins, C. P., & Cousins, I. T. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04806 · Cited by 1,921
Lenka, S. P., Kah, M., & Padhye, L. P. (2021) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2021.117187 · Cited by 755
Andrews, D. Q., & Naidenko, O. V. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00713 · Cited by 270
Guo, B., Zeng, J., & Brusseau, M. L. (2020) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2019wr026667 · Cited by 224
Pétré, M.-A., Genereux, D. P., Koropeckyj-Cox, L., Knappe, D. R. U., Duboscq, S., Gilmore, T. E., & Hopkins, Z. R. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c07978 · Cited by 184
Liu, Y.-L., & Sun, M. (2021) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2021.117781 · Cited by 184 · cited 1×
“te ch n iq u es Ion-exchange 40 PFAS 600 ng/L 90% removal in 24h [19] Coagulation PFOA, PFOS 100 ng/L ∼20% removal in 90 min [20] Adsorption 9 PFAS 300 ng/L 80% removal in 40 min [21] RO and nanofiltration PFOA, PFOS 10000 μg/L 90% during 4 days [22] Foam fractionation 16 PFAS 2500 ng/L 50-80% removal in 10 min [23]”
MethodMcMahon, P. B., Tokranov, A. K., Bexfield, L. M., Lindsey, B. D., Johnson, T. D., Lombard, M. A., & Watson, E. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c04795 · Cited by 183 · cited 1×
“McMahon et al. (2022)[12] determined that PFAS can be found in eastern US groundwater, which is an essential source of drinking water; 14 of the 24 type PFAS were identified, with at least one PFAS detected in 20% and 60% of the domestic wells and public water supplies, respectively.”
BackgroundPoly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in seawater and plankton from the northwestern Atlantic Margin
Zhang, X., Lohmann, R., & Sunderland, E. M. (2019) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b03230 · Cited by 163
Kolpin, D. W., Hubbard, L. E., Cwiertny, D. M., Meppelink, S. M., Thompson, D. A., & Gray, J. L. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00750 · Cited by 67
Dawson, D. E., Lau, C., Pradeep, P., Sayre, R. R., Judson, R. S., Tornero-Velez, R., & Wambaugh, J. F. (2023) · Toxics · doi:10.3390/toxics11020098 · Cited by 56
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 42
- 10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.045 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.envint.2019.04.008 · DOI
- 10.1136/oemed-2017-104651 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s40572-018-0173-4 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.135 · DOI
- 10.1002/awwa.1073 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.envres.2019.01.021 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.est.0c06978 · DOI
- Epa, 2022, Lifetime Health Advisories and Health Effects Support Documents for Perfluorooctanoic Acid and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Prepublication
- 10.1039/D0EM00147C · DOI
- 10.1016/j.watres.2012.09.024 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.watres.2020.115897 · DOI
- 10.1021/es062052f · DOI
- 10.1002/aws2.1238 · DOI
- 10.1039/C9EW01050E · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cej.2020.126698 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.01.072 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1039/C9EW00701F · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105196 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.eti.2015.06.001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101393 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/rem.21553 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.01.028 · DOI
- 10.1038/srep22674 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41597-021-00798-x · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.est.2c01764 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126593 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00374 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131097 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130124 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109920 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c01204 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00374 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.est.9b04833 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130303 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151018 · DOI
- 10.1007/s40572-022-00389-x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120775 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125075 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.envres.2022.114286 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113359 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.estlett.9b00476 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hu, M., & Scott, C. (2024) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.00157-24 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Andraju, N., Curtzwiler, G., Ji, Y., Kozliak, E., & Ranganathan, P.
- Affiliations
- School of of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS), University of North Dakota,Grand Forks,ND,USA
- Iowa State University,Polymer and and Food Protection Consortium,Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition,Ames,IA,USA
- University of North Dakota,Department of Chemical Engineering,Grand Forks,ND,USA
- University of North Dakota,Department of Chemistry,Grand Forks,ND,USA
- Venue
- 2023 IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology (eIT)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-05-18
- Pages
- 137-142
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 11
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
