ReCiPla - Cyclic Soil Microplastic Remover
GROSSMANN, João Miguel Sastre. ReCiPla - Cyclic Soil Microplastic Remover: A way to remove microplastics from soil using electrostatics. 2023. 28 p. Research report – Scientific Apprentice Program, Colégio Dante Alighieri, São Paulo, 2023. Microplastics are the largest form of physical pollution on the planet. Affecting everything from terrestrial and aquatic environments to the air, compounds up to 1 micrometer in size are present inside the human body and can intoxicate the main organs in which they are found, such as the lungs, spleen, liver, and heart. Therefore, methods of removing these compounds from nature are essential, which is why this research is based on electrostatically removing MP from the soil. To this end, a vibrating conveyor belt was designed that would act in conjunction with a plate electrified by a Van de Graaff generator to separate the plastic compound using electric field induction. After characterization tests to quantify the voltage produced by the generator, which produced an average of 95 kV, the vibrating belt was made and will be used later in conjunction with the electrostatic method. This methodology suggests that it’s a success even after the electrified plate was applied to its structure. It carried out the proposed processes, such as moving the test masses, vibrating them, and fully supporting the electrified plate. In addition, the electrostatic removal method was tested to verify its efficiency and applicability. It was found that the removal of microplastics ranged it from 10 to 20% efficiency, suggesting it to be an effective method for separating microplastics. It should be noted that these statistics will be improved as the research progresses. In this way, the research proved capable of establishing an electrostatic removal method, as well as a process for transporting the material to be removed, thus achieving the objectives it set out to achieve. Finally, it should be noted that this research is still under development, with a view to applying the process in conjunction with the conveyor belt to carry out sample tests, as well as improving the removal process in the future to make it more efficient.
From Human Intelligence to Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: Modern Day Writing
The purpose of the project was to find out whether humans can tell the difference between human-generated text and artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots-generated text and to identify how Al-generated text differs from human-generated text. The dependent variable was the results given by the participants (whether the paragraphs were Al-generated texts or human-generated text). The Independent variable was the participants in the experiment and the controlled variable was the type of paragraphs (both the Al-generated texts and human-generated texts) and time used to test each participant. The hypothesis for this experiment was that the participants were not going to be able to differentiate between AI-generated text and human-generated text. In this descriptive and mixed-method study, participants were presented with questionnaires. Each participant needed to state whether they thought each paragraph was human-generated or AI-generated. At the end of the questionnaire, the participants were asked to briefly explain what assisted them in differentiating between the two. They were given 60 seconds to decide. A stopwatch was used to time them. A sample of 456 participants took part in this project. They were not told how many AI-generated passages and human-generated passages there were in the selection. They only knew the total number of passages. Over 99% of the participants could not correctly differentiate between AI-generated text and human-generated text in all passages. Only four participants were able to get 100% of the questions correct. All four learners attend schools located in urban areas. After I did my analysis, I discovered that my hypothesis was incorrect. Four of the participants were able to get 100% of the questions correct this indicates that not all the participants were not able to tell the difference between Al-generated text and human-generated text. This rejects my hypothesis. However, the chances of humans differentiating between the two are very low. All four learners attend schools located in urban areas; this indicates that it is easier for learners attending urban area schools to recognise AI-generated texts than learners attending schools located in rural areas.