MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aromatics extraction from pyrolytic sugars using ionic liquid to enhance sugar fermentability

2016· article· en· W2371204633 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaohua Li, Luis Carlos Luque-Moreno, Stijn Oudenhoven, Lars Rehmann, Sascha R.A. Kersten, Boelo Schuur

Bibliographic record

VenueBioresource Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsLevoglucosanChemistryIonic liquidSugarExtraction (chemistry)FermentationHydrolysisDicyanamideEthanolChromatographyPyrolytic carbonBiofuelEthyl acetateOrganic chemistryWaste managementCatalysisPyrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fermentative bioethanol production from pyrolytic sugars was improved via aromatics removal by liquid-liquid extraction. As solvents, the ionic liquid (IL) trihexyltetradecylphosphonium dicyanamide (P666,14[N(CN)2]) and ethyl acetate (EA) were compared. Two pyrolytic sugar solutions were created from acid-leached and untreated pinewood, with levoglucosan contents (most abundant sugar) of 29.0% and 8.3% (w/w), respectively. In a single stage extraction, 70% of the aromatics were effectively removed by P666,14[N(CN)2] and 50% by EA, while no levoglucosan was extracted. The IL was regenerated by vacuum evaporation (100mbar) at 220°C, followed by extraction of aromatics from fresh pyrolytic sugar solutions. Regenerated IL extracted aromatics with similar extraction efficiency as the fresh IL, and the purified sugar fraction from pretreated pinewood was hydrolyzed to glucose and fermented to ethanol, yielding 0.46g ethanol/(g glucose), close to the theoretical maximum yield.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations41
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioresource TechnologySame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207