Data & assumptions
What the model assumes, in numbers
Material library
Every candidate MOF, real data and gaps alike
Tier A -- real isotherm, no data-quality flag
Tier B -- real isotherm, flagged for review
Tier C -- no NIST isotherm, exploratory
Live analysis console
Advanced options
Daily operating plan (example day)
AdsorbRelease + condenseIdle
00040812162024
Decision detail
What else was considered, and why
Compare, justify, and stress-test the recommendation above.
Decision view
Top candidate comparison
Bubble size represents simulated daily yield.
Preferred direction: higher working capacity + feasible regeneration (left of the dashed heat limit).
Decision view
Why this material won
Generated from the actual ranking factors for this scenario.
Score contribution (100 = max weight)
Predicted range vs. target
How was this computed?
Guardrails
AirWater is allowed to say no
Automatic refusal logic, not just disclaimer text.
Appropriate use
AirWater can
- Compare candidate MOFs under the same assumptions.
- Evaluate climate/material compatibility.
- Estimate a research-screening yield range.
- Prioritize materials for laboratory testing.
- Generate an explainable operating schedule.
- Identify the failure conditions behind a refusal.
Outside scope
AirWater cannot
- Manufacture, characterize, or certify a MOF.
- Guarantee device-scale water output.
- Prove long-term material stability.
- Rule out chemical leaching.
- Declare harvested water potable.
- Replace engineering or regulatory review.
Recommended validation path — current position highlighted
Research screening→
Curated experimental isotherms→
Lab adsorption validation→
Cycling + leaching→
Device prototype→
Water-quality testing→
Validated deployment model
Data provenance