MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973316826 · doi:10.3390/ijms151018967

Extrusion Pretreatment of Lignocellulosic Biomass: A Review

2014· review· en· W1973316826 on OpenAlexafffund
Zheng Jun, Lars Rehmann

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsBioconversionBiofuelCellulosic ethanolLignocellulosic biomassBiomass (ecology)Pulp and paper industryEnzymatic hydrolysisCelluloseEnvironmental scienceEthanol fuelSugarBiochemical engineeringBiotechnologyChemistryWaste managementHydrolysisAgronomyFood scienceEngineeringFermentationOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass to bioethanol has shown environmental, economic and energetic advantages in comparison to bioethanol produced from sugar or starch. However, the pretreatment process for increasing the enzymatic accessibility and improving the digestibility of cellulose is hindered by many physical-chemical, structural and compositional factors, which make these materials difficult to be used as feedstocks for ethanol production. A wide range of pretreatment methods has been developed to alter or remove structural and compositional impediments to (enzymatic) hydrolysis over the last few decades; however, only a few of them can be used at commercial scale due to economic feasibility. This paper will give an overview of extrusion pretreatment for bioethanol production with a special focus on twin-screw extruders. An economic assessment of this pretreatment is also discussed to determine its feasibility for future industrial cellulosic ethanol plant designs.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations200
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207