Electro-osmotic dewatering of soaked hemp stems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemp stems were immersed in water as a pretreatment to enhance the production of hemp fiber. To reduce the high moisture content, the soaked hemp stems were dewatered using a bench-type electro-osmotic roller press. Variables like applied voltage (12, 24, and 36 V), roller pressure (1000, 2000, and 3000 kPa), and duration of soaking of hemp stems (12, 24, and 36 h) were subjected to investigation and the percentage of total water expelled due to electro-osmotic dewatering (EOD) at various levels of experiments was recorded. Hemp stems soaked for 24 h treated at a roller pressure of 2,000 kPa at an applied voltage of 36 V showed the maximum water removal after EOD process. The water removal was found to be increasing with increase in applied voltage and roller pressure. Soaking time up to 32 h leads to an increase in water removal and then it started decreasing. The probable reason for that was the penetration of surface water into micropores and its adhesion to the lignocellulosic bonds. Electro-osmotic permeability of hemp stems at various levels of voltages, roller pressures, and soaking times was studied and the result proved that electro-osmotic permeability was inversely proportional to applied voltage and it was independent of the applied pressure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".