Aspects on bleaching and tempo-mediated oxidation of wheat straw pulp fractions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study outlines research concerning wheat straw fines, including their impact on pulp bleachability, their modification by chemical means, and their use as a dry strength enhancer in a paper application. Results show that primary fines constituting about 23% of the whole wheat straw pulp had a large negative impact on pulp bleachability. The differences in response to bleaching were due to the different properties of the fines, i.e. higher kappa number, higher metal ion content, lower brightness, and lower viscosity compared to that of fibers. It was also shown that the fines fraction is more difficult to oxidize and does not reach as high fiber charge levels as that of the other fractions. However, at a dosage of ≥ 3 mmol hypochlorite/g it was possible to prepare nanofibers from wheat straw fines that showed a good strength-enhancing effect in a paper product. The fact that removal of fines from wheat straw pulps by fractionation improves bleachability and also drainage properties at the same time, while simultaneously the fines can be modified and used as a strength enhancer, is very interesting when evaluating the potential of this type of annual plant as a source for production of different paper products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".