Effects of enzyme pretreatment on the beatability of fast-growing poplar APMP pulp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of enzyme pretreatment on the properties of fast-growing poplar APMP pulp were evaluated. Compared with the unpretreated pulp, the beatabilities of the pulp that had been pretreated by enzymes were improved significantly, such as a decrease of Canadian Standard Freeness (CSF) in the range of 25 mL to 55 mL, a decrease of PFI mill revolutions from 1000r to 5500r, and a decrease of beating energy consumption from 12.5% to 22.0%. The values of brightness, breaking length, tearing index, bursting index, and folding number of the pulp pretreated by cellulase were improved by 1.2%ISO, 23.7%, 14.8%, 14.6%, and 50% respectively, while that of the pulp pretreated by xylanase were respectively improved by 2.1%ISO, 16.8%, 8.8%, 8.9%, and 25%. The optimal enzyme dosages were 25 IU•g-1 and 25IU•g-1 for cellulase and xylanase, respectively. Fibre quality analysis results showed that the fibre length of pretreated pulp increased partly, fibre width and fines content decreased, fibres torsion increased, and fibre bonding got stronger. X-ray diffractometer analysis indicated that the degree of crystallinity of fibres increased after the enzyme pretreatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".