MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094169005 · doi:10.1021/bm501732b

Effect of Xylan Structure on Reactivity in Graft Copolymerization and Subsequent Binding to Cellulose

2015· article· en· W2094169005 on OpenAlexaff
Kuisma Littunen, Petri Kilpeläinen, Karoliina Junka, Mika H. Sipponen, Emma R. Master, Jukka Seppälä

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersTekesAcademy of Finland
KeywordsChemistryCelluloseGlycidyl methacrylateReactivity (psychology)SolubilityAdsorptionPolymer chemistryOrganic chemistryArabinoseCopolymerGraftingPolymerXylose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The grafting reactivities with glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) of five xylans from hardwood and cereal sources were compared. The structural property that best predicted the reactivities of xylans with GMA was the fraction of 4-O-methylglucuronic acid (MeGlcA) substitution. A comparatively high level of arabinose substitution was also positively correlated to reactivity with GMA. The impact of MeGlcA and arabinose branching groups is likely attributed to the solubilizing effect of these substituents. Consistent with this prediction, low water solubility and high lignin content were found to hinder reactivity. Even though oligomeric substrates have the advantage of water solubility, modified xylo-oligosaccharides were difficult to purify. Accordingly, delignified and high-molecular weight xylans that are soluble or dispersible in water are best suited for this type of backbone derivatization. Adsorption studies with a quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation indicated that grafting lowered the total adsorption of arabinoxylan but did not significantly affect the fraction of xylans adsorbed irreversibly on cellulose.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207