Effects of ozone and chlorine dioxide on the chemical properties of cellulose fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effects of ozone and chlorine dioxide on the structure of hardwood cellulose fibers were studied by chemical methods. Chlorine dioxide had very little effect on the cellulose degree of polymerization (DPv), although 40–50% of the chlorine dioxide charged was consumed. By contrast, ozonation of the cellulosic fibers resulted in a substantial reduction in the cellulose DPv. Increasing the ozone charge increased the extent of cellulose degradation. At an ozone charge of approximately 3 wt % (20 mol equiv/100 g of fiber), a 40% reduction in DPv, as measured by cupriethylenediamine viscosity, was observed. A comparison of the cellulose DPv values obtained for ozonated cellulose fibers reduced with sodium borohydride before the viscosity measurements increased confirmed that the primary reaction of ozone with the cellulose fibers was glycosidic bond cleavage, with only a small amount of cellulose oxidation taking place. A functional group analysis of the ozonated cellulose fibers revealed a slight increase in the amount of carbonyl groups introduced into the fibers. In addition, carbon dioxide was detected, which combined with the lack of change in the carboxyl group content, indicated that the oxidation mechanism likely occurred in a three‐step process: formation of the carbonyl groups, followed by oxidation to carboxyl groups, and finally, decarboxylation resulting in glycosidic bond cleavage. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 93: 1219–1223, 2004
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".