MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608392534 · doi:10.22092/ijwpr.2014.7621

Evaluation of the refining effects on the properties of transparent paper produced from bagasse fiber

2014· article· en· W1608392534 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
علی عبدالخانی

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefining (metallurgy)BagasseFiberMaterials sciencePulp and paper industryProcess engineeringComposite materialMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted with the aim of producing laboratory samples of transparent paper using overbeating method. Hence, bagasse bleached soda pulp was subjected to post-bleaching sequence of DED to remove residual chromophores. Then this pulp was refined in a PFI mill to reach different levels of 55, 130, 200, and 260 mL,CSF (Canadian standard freeness) freeness. Then handsheets were made according to TAPPI standard T 205 om– 8. Results indicated that refining has significant effect on optical properties especially transparency so that the maximum value was observed using pulp with the minimum freeness, i.e. 55 ml. The variations of transparency due to refining were also further explained by measuring scattering coefficient, opacity and brightness of the specimens. In addition, mercury porosimetry and analyzing the pictures of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) demonstrated the extensive variations of pore structure in paper during refining which impose great influence on developing transparency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.306
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.154 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMaterial Properties and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207