MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034348721 · doi:10.2166/wst.2010.068

Cellular biopolymers and molecular structure of a secondary pulp and paper mill sludge verified by spectroscopy and chemical extraction techniques

2010· article· en· W2034348721 on OpenAlex
Maryam Edalatmanesh, Mohini Sain, Steven N. Liss

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLigninCellulosePulp (tooth)ChemistryExtraction (chemistry)Extracellular polymeric substancePaper millPulp and paper industryPulp millPolysaccharideChemical compositionChromatographyChemical engineeringWaste managementOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For proper treatment, recycling, or disposal of the pulp and paper mill secondary sludge qualitative and quantitative determination of its characteristics are necessary. Chemical extraction, quantitative characterization, and spectroscopic experiments have been performed to determine the molecular composition and chemical functionality of a pulp and paper mill secondary sludge. In order to extract the low-molecular-weight substances, soxhlet extraction with polar and non-polar solvents was performed where most of the target substances (17±1.3%.) were extracted after 2 hours. Over time, this extraction followed a first-order kinetics. Fiber analyses have shown 12±3% lignin, 28±3% cellulose, and 12±4% hemicelluloses content. The ash content was about 17±0.5%. In this work, 7 and 16% intra- and extracellular polymeric substances, respectively, were extracted from the secondary sludge. EPS and mixture of intra- and extracellular biopolymers have shown similar chemical functionalities. These analyses confirmed that the paper secondary sludge consisted mainly of wood fiber, i.e. lignocellulosic substances, along with proteins and polysaccharides originated from microorganisms.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.185 · 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