MESSAI.io/Parameters
CatalogCorrelationsGlobal AnalysisParameter SweepMethodology
run 9aef7200corpus v2026-05-19model gp-scm-v1.2.0ran 0.0s
SWEEPexternal_resistancefrom10to5000across12 log stepsat fixedT = 30°C, pH = 7, HRT = 1 h, area = 50 cm², culture = mixed_anaerobic
Viewpaper: kim-2003-mbesbacktest (all papers)
anti-HARKing rail · Logan & Regan 2006
WARNV6Mean CE × OLR = 126.0 exceeds empirical Logan-group envelope (≤25). Mass transport limits CE at high loading; prediction may be optimistic.· Cheng & Logan 2011 — empirical envelope
Platform
Microbial electrochemical systems · living biofilm catalyst
System type
Sweep parameter
Fixed conditions
Objective
Reproducing

Kim BH, Chang IS, Gil GC, Park HS, Kim HJ (2003) — Biotechnology Letters

Novel BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) sensor using mediator-less microbial fuel cell
DOI: 10.1023/A:1022891231369
MetricReportedPredictedΔBand
Current density
steady-state sensor current density at ~100 mg/L BOD analyte feed (mid-range of the calibration), 30°C, ferricyanide catholyte. The sensor headline number is the LINEAR-RANGE limit, not the peak current; we encode the mid-range current as the most representative single-point comparison.
p. 542, Fig. 1 + Table 1
0.50
A/m²
0.39
A/m²
-21.2%green
Coulombic efficiency
apparent coulombic efficiency in the sensor configuration; lower than analytical-MFC CE because the sensor is operated FAR from peak power to stay in the linear-response regime
p. 542, §Results
35.0
%
35.0
%
0.0%green
Sensor K_M
Michaelis-Menten K_M for whole-cell BOD biofilm — analyte concentration at i_max/2. Sets the upper end of the linear dynamic range. Paper reports linear current-vs-BOD across ~0-100 mg/L BOD; the upper limit ≈ K_M for a Hill-saturating sensor (h ≈ 1.2).
p. 542, Fig. 2 + Table 1
100
mg/L BOD
100
mg/L BOD
0.0%green
Sensor LOD
lower limit of detection — paper notes instrument lower bound at ~3-5 mg/L BOD with the synthetic-wastewater pure-culture-like biofilm (clean baseline, low noise floor). For BOD biosensors operating in low-noise conditions, LOD ≈ baseline microbial current + 3σ per IUPAC.
p. 542, §Results (instrument lower bound)
5.00
mg/L BOD
5.00
mg/L BOD
0.0%green
Dynamic range
log10(K_M / LOD) = log10(100 / 5) ≈ 1.3 decades. Derived from the paper's linear-range bounds (5 mg/L to 100 mg/L BOD).
p. 542, derived from Fig. 2 endpoints
1.30
decades
1.30
decades
0.0%green
Δ-bands per Logan & Regan 2006 lab-to-lab reproducibility envelope: green ≤±25%, amber ±25–50%, red >±50%. Predictions from Butler-Volmer + Ohmic + Tafel closure calibrated against the Logan corpus (regression-tested in butler-volmer-calibration.test.ts).
What we don't know about this paper (6 items)
  1. Wave 3 (2026-05-22) — LOD vs K_M are now reported as SEPARATE series (substrate_lod_mg_per_L and substrate_k_m_mg_per_L). Previously both were squeezed into one generic `substrate` reportedResult, which made the Tardy-2020 holdout (LOD=20 mg/L) un-comparable to this preset (linear-range upper=100 mg/L) — they are different physical quantities (noise-floor lower bound vs Michaelis-Menten saturation upper bound). The +400% Wave-2 T9 false-failure was a category error, not a real model gap.
  2. BOD vs COD: the paper reports BOD (5-day biological oxygen demand), the harness uses COD (chemical oxygen demand). For typical wastewater, BOD ≈ 0.6-0.7 × COD. We encode the analyte at ~150 mg/L COD to correspond to ~100 mg/L BOD; the conversion factor varies with feed composition.
  3. Sensor response time (~30-60 min) and drift (~5-10% per week) are not yet in the backtest seriesKey set. These are CRITICAL for sensor applications; the next physics extension (Wave 4) should add `response_time_sec` and `drift_per_week_pct` keys.
  4. Ferricyanide catholyte is research-only — toxic and unsustainable for commercial sensors. Modern commercial BOD biosensors use air cathodes with carefully-controlled cathode hydrodynamics; the calibration would be different.
  5. The 2003 paper used artificial wastewater (defined-composition feed). Real-wastewater BOD sensors require frequent re-calibration because the feed composition varies and the current-vs-BOD slope shifts with the BOD-to-COD ratio of the actual stream.
  6. LOD reportedValue=5 mg/L BOD corresponds to the paper's "instrument lower bound" with a clean synthetic-wastewater biofilm. Real-wastewater inoculum has noisier baseline current and ~4× higher LOD (e.g., Tardy 2020 reports 20 mg/L); the biofilmStabilityFactor knob in buildMBESSensorSweep captures this.
Source mix
EMP 0CAL 0SIM 12EXT 0
Peak power density
371mW/m²✓ mass-bal
at x = 10 · n=0 nearby papers
Coulombic efficiency
35.0%
mixed-culture realistic range 20-55%
Internal resistance
850Ω·cm²
area-normalized; Logan-group standard
Empirical coverage
0.92@ 95%
n=52 · ECE 0.03 · small-n fold-back
SHOW
22.5710017825533341010.010082006300440025000Power density (areal) (mW/m²)external_resistance (Ω)x=10 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=17.6 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=31 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=54.5 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=95.8 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=169 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=297 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=522 · Power density (areal)=371.3 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=918 · Power density (areal)=232.2 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=1620 · Power density (areal)=138.7 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=2840 · Power density (areal)=82.2 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papersx=5000 · Power density (areal)=48.4 mW/m² · SIMULATED · 0 nearby papers◆ optimum371.3 mW/m² @ 10