Characterization of four different lignins as a first step toward the identification of suitable end‐use applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT To determine the most appropriate use of lignin, surface, structural, and thermal characteristics of lignin was investigated in this work. It was observed that kraft lignin (KL), the lignin of prehydrolysis liquor (LPHL), lignosulfonate of NSSC process (LSL), and lignosulfonates (LSs) of sulfite pulping process had 0.67, 0.25, 0.90, and 1.52–2.25 meq/g anionic charge density, and 6.3, 2.1, 10.1, and 8.8–10.1 nm hydrodynamic diameter, respectively. These results suggested that LSL and LSs could be used more effectively than other lignin as filler modifiers, flocculants, and dispersants. The combustion studies of the lignin samples suggested that KL and LPHL combusted more efficiently than other samples, as they had high heating (calorific) values of 27.02 and 19.2 MJ/kg, the apparent activation energy of 126.64 and 99.14 kJ/mol based on Flynn–Wall–Ozawa method and 122.16 and 94.73 kJ/mol based on Kissinger–Akahira–Sunose and no ash, respectively. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2015, 132, 42336.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".