Comparison of the Chitosan Degradation through Hydrothermal and Sonication-Hydrothermal Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chitosan is a natural substance that has many applications in the fields of pharmacy and medicine. Because it hashigh molecular weight and does not dissolved easily in a neutral pH solution, then there is an effort todepolymerize chitosan into low molecular weight chitosan and oligomers. Nowdays, one of the methods used todegrade biomass is hydrothermal. Hydrotermal is one method of biomass degradation and polymers that is quiteeffective and environmentally friendly. Because chitosan has strong hydrogen bonds in addition to highmolecular weight, it is necessary to treat chitosan by sonication before subjected to hydrothermal process. Thisstudy will compare degrading chitosan by only hydrothermal process and also sonication–hydrothermalprocesses. The hydrothermal of chitosan was carried out using a stainless steel tube reactor of 4-mL capacity at200 °C for 4 s under pressures of 25 MPa for both of hydrothermal systems. For sonication– hydrothermalprocesses, chitosan was treated with sonication at 40 oC for 30 and 120 min before subjected to hydrothermalprocess. After hydrothermal, chitosan was characterized by viscosimetry and HPLC to determine molecularwight and also the dissolved product. Based on the product yield of the process, the sonication (40 °C,120 mins,1 %)-hydrothermal process (200 °C, 4 mins) was the best process on this study and gave lactose yield as much as90 %.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".