MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030082285 · doi:10.5539/ijc.v3n1p176

Application of Composite Addictives in Paper-Making Using Slag-wool Fiber

2011· article· en· W2030082285 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Han, Wenjiang Feng, Wei Cheng, Feng Chen, Rongrong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPapermakingComposite numberUltimate tensile strengthFolding enduranceChemistryPulp (tooth)Composite materialSILKLimePulp and paper industryPolymerMaterials scienceMetallurgyDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The composite paper was made successfully from the heterogeneous mixture of common pulp and slag-wool fibers,without/with different amounts of composite addictives. These physical properties, including tensile strength,folding endurance, and smoothness, etc., were investigated in detail. All physical properties of the composite paper,made from the 30% slag wool fibers & 70% paper pulp, and no any composite addictive, decrease sharply, incomparison with common paper. While for the same paper with addition of optimum amount (0.5%) of compositeaddictives, the tensile strength increases by 15%, while the folding endurance, by 40%. Therefore, it is vital tointroduce composite addictives in the process of composite papermaking. The aforementioned investigation canreduce the amount of paper pulp, and therefore, protect our forest resource.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ChemistrySame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207