Recovery of Acetic Acid from the Prehydrolysis Liquor of Kraft Based Dissolving Pulp Production Process: Sodium Hydroxide Back Extraction from the Trioctylamine/Octanol System
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acetic acid is an important potential product from the prehydrolysis liquor (PHL) of the kraft based dissolving pulp production process. This study focuses on the recovery of acetic acid from an industrial PHL from an Eastern Canadian Pulp mill that contains about 1% acetic acid. Reactive extraction with tri- n -octylamine (TOA) using octanol as a diluent was investigated as the potential process. Subsequently, the complexed acetic acid in the organic phase (TOA–octanol) was back extracted using a sodium hydroxide solution, while the solvent (TOA–octanol) was regenerated. The recovered acetic acid concentration was increased with increasing organic to aqueous phase ratio but at the expense of decreased extraction efficiency. At the organic to aqueous phase ratio of 40 and the NaOH to acetic acid (HAc) mole ratio of 1, the acetic acid concentration reached to 15.0, 9.8, and 10.3% for MAA (1% model acetic acid), PHL (prehydrolysis liquor), and TPHL (treated prehydrolysis liquor), respectively. It was concluded that the reactive extraction using TOA–octanol, followed by sodium hydroxide back extraction, is an efficient process in recovering and concentrating acetic acid from PHL.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it