MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2384382926

Preparation of Fibres-Chitosan Deposition and Its Retention and Drainage Performance

2014· article· en· W2384382926 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePaper and Paper Making · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChitosanAcetic acidUltimate tensile strengthChemistryDrainageKraft paperX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyDeposition (geology)Nuclear chemistryChemical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialOrganic chemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the deposition process, deposits of fiber-CS(CPF) were prepared by depositing the chitosan(CS) dissolved in 5% acetic acid onto Canada kraft pulp(CKP). The CPF was characterized by FT-IR, SEM and XPS. The suitable preparative conditions were: 0.5% CS, 4% NaOH, 20℃ and 30 min. CPF could improve the retention of PCC filler significantly. With 5% CPF, the retention of PCC increased from 67.72% to 71.47%. The tensile and burst strength of the paper with CPF were higher than those with CPAM significantly, not lower than those with untreated CKP. CPF addition also had a positive effect on the improvement of stock drainage.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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