MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081814201 · doi:10.1515/hf.2008.066

The fate of phosphorus in the bleaching of spruce TMP with the new bleaching agent – THPS

2008· article· en· W2081814201 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Q. Hu, Eric Yu, Brian R. James, P. Marcazzan

Bibliographic record

VenueHolzforschung · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaFPInnovations
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsPulp (tooth)LigninChemistryKappa numberCovalent bondChlorideKraft processOrganic chemistryNuclear chemistryPulp and paper industryKraft paper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulfate (THPS) is a newly discovered, phosphorus-based bleaching agent that has been successfully tested in a pulp mill trial. The fate of phosphorus (P) and the chemistry in the course of THPS bleaching of a spruce TMP have been studied. The amount of P introduced into the THPS-bleached pulp depends on THPS dose and the bleaching conditions and it correlates well with the brightness gain. The P introduced into THPS-bleached pulp is covalently bonded to the pulp. The THPS-bleached and tetraethylphosphonium chloride-treated pulps have been additionally treated with calcium chloride before P analysis, and the results of these experiments support the covalent bonding hypothesis. Bleaching with 0.1 and 3.0% THPS (% based on oven-dried pulp) at 60 and 110°C leads to pulps with 0.13 and 2.17 mg P g -1 pulp, respectively, which corresponds to 0.08 and 1.4% THPS. More precisely, P is covalently bonded to lignin chromophores, such as lignin coniferaldehydes. This was found by P-content analysis, UV-visible spectroscopy, and 31 P{ 1 H} NMR studies of a crude milled wood lignin (crude MWL) and a partially purified MWL isolated from a THPS-bleached pulp.

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 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 score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHolzforschungSame topicLignin and Wood ChemistryFrench-language works237,207