MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2486451750 · doi:10.1080/07388551.2016.1189871

Recent developments in the production and applications of bacterial cellulose fibers and nanocrystals

2016· review· en· W2486451750 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabela Reiniati, Andrew N. Hrymak, Argyrios Margaritis

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Biotechnology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBacterial celluloseCelluloseNanocrystalNanotechnologyProduction (economics)Materials scienceChemistryBiochemical engineeringEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellulosic nanomaterials provide a novel and sustainable platform for the production of high performance materials enabled by nanotechnology. Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a highly crystalline material and contains pure cellulose without lignin and hemicellulose. BC offers an opportunity to provide control of the products' properties in-situ, via specific BC production methods and culture conditions. The BC potential in advanced material applications are hindered by a limited knowledge of optimal BC production conditions, efficient process scale-up, separation methods, and purification methods. There is a growing body of work on the production of bacterial cellulose nanocrystals (BCNs) from BC fibers. However, there is limited information regarding the effect of BC fibers' characteristics on the production of nanocrystals. This review describes developments in BC and BCNs production methods and factors affecting their yield and physical characteristics.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations223
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in BiotechnologySame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207