Structure Property Correlation of Thermally Treated Hemp Fiber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Summary: Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) is an important ligno‐cellulosic raw material for the manufacture of cost‐effective environmentally friendly composite materials. Hemp plant samples of different initial condition (stem and bast fibers) were subjected to heating varying the temperature (from 160 to 260 °C) and the ambient heating environment (air and inert atmosphere). Weight measurements showed that all heat treatment resulted in a reduced weight of hemp. Those treated in air showed drastic decline in weight compared with those treated under nitrogen, especially at a temperature higher than 220 °C. Observation using optical and scanning microscope showed the possibilities of opening up of the fiber bundles in both heating environments. However, higher temperature and presence of air had a more severe effect on fibers and associated tissues compared to effects under nitrogen. Heat treatment at 220 °C under nitrogen seemed to provide enough fiber opening without affecting tissues of the fibers. SEM micrograph of the cross‐section of hemp fiber heat treated in air environment. magnified image SEM micrograph of the cross‐section of hemp fiber heat treated in air environment.
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) | 0.002 | 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".