MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379737832

Comparison of Wet Strength Performance of Different Kinds of Wet Strength Agents on Kenaf Mulch

2005· article· en· W2379737832 on OpenAlexaff
Wu Xing

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWet strengthMulchKenafPulp (tooth)Air permeability specific surfacePulp and paper industryMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceComposite materialAgronomyFiberEngineeringKraft paper
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land coverage with plastic film has brought great economic benefits to agriculture. But it also has caused serious soil pollution. The use of biodegradable mulch film made of cellulous fibers is an important way to resolve this problem. Mulch is used in the open air of such weather as windy, rainy, fine and cloudy.So higher dry and wet strength is required. In this paper, performance of sheet with adding polyamide polyamine epichlorohydrin(PAE)、 melamine formaldehyde (MF) and chitosan in kenaf pulp were studied, which given degree 53° SR, Carboxyl methyl cellulose(CMC) amount 0.1% ,soluable polyethylene (PVA) amount 1% . Breaking length, wet dry strength ratio, tear index and burst index of kenaf mulch were measured and optimum wet strength agent in varied properties was selected. The aim is to make mulch have properties of heat preservation, humidity preservation, growth prompting, biodegradation and maximum wet strength and improve impact resistance of mulch to rainwater so as to assure growth of plant and replace plastic film.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207