Superhydrophobic Lignocellulosic Wood Fiber/Mineral Networks
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
Lignocellulosic wood fibers and mineral fillers (calcium carbonate, talc, or clay) were used to prepare paper samples (handsheets), which were then subjected to a fluorocarbon plasma treatment. The plasma treatment was performed in two steps: first using oxygen plasma to create nanoscale roughness on the surface of the handsheet, and second fluorocarbon deposition plasma to add a layer of low surface energy material. The wetting behavior of the resulting fiber/mineral network (handsheet) was determined. It was found the samples that were subjected to oxygen plasma etching prior to fluorocarbon deposition exhibit superhydrophobicity with low contact angle hysteresis. On the other hand, those that were only treated by fluorocarbon plasma resulted in "sticky" hydrophobicity behavior. Moreover, as the mineral content in the handsheet increases, the hydrophobicity after plasma treatment decreases. Finally, it was found that although the plasma-treated handsheets show excellent water repellency they are not good water vapor barriers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.019 |
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