MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315834454 · doi:10.1021/ef500538s

Characterization of High-Boiling-Solvent Lignin from Hot-Water-Extracted Bagasse

2014· article· en· W2315834454 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Wang, Shanshan Liu, Guihua Yang, Jiachuan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOrganosolvLigninBagasseChemistryHemicelluloseCelluloseSteam explosionFourier transform infrared spectroscopyExtraction (chemistry)Thermal stabilityGel permeation chromatographyChromatographyOrganic chemistryNuclear chemistryChemical engineeringPulp and paper industryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complicated structures of bagasse hinder the bioconversion processes for the production of bioenergy and biomaterials. In this study, an integrated process of hot-water extraction followed by high-boiling-solvent cooking (HBS, i.e., 1,4-butanediol) was demonstrated to fractionate bagasse into hemicellulose, lignin, and cellulose. The hot-water extraction resulted in the removal of hemicellulose, which facilitated the HBS cooking for the open fiber structure. As a result, 57–70% of lignin was isolated from the cooking spent liquor. Gel permeation chromatography (GPC), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), 31 P and 1 H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and thermogravimetry (TG) were employed for characterization of the organosolv lignin. Results showed that the organosolv lignin exhibited a chemical structure similar to enzymatic hydrolysis/mild acidolysis lignin (EMAL) but formed new phenolic OH groups (3–6-fold of EMAL). The high molecular weight and thermal stability would contribute to the potential application of lignin into value-added products. The proposed processes provide an efficient approach for fractionating the three main components of bagasse, especially lignin.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicLignin and Wood ChemistryFrench-language works237,207