MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564781725 · doi:10.1002/slct.201601476

New Biorefinery Strategy for High Purity Lignin Production

2016· article· en· W2564781725 on OpenAlexafffund
Georges Koumba-Yoya, Tatjana Stevanović

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistrySelect · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation de l’Université Laval
KeywordsOrganosolvBiorefineryLigninKraft paperChemistryPulp and paper industryKraft processSulfiteElectrospinningCatalysisOrganic chemistryChemical engineeringRaw materialPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to their aromatic nature, lignins are of particular interest for chemical conversions of lignocellulosic resources. Organosolv pulping processes generally provide higher purity lignins, with lower sugar and ash contents than is the case with conventional pulping technologies (kraft, sulfite or soda). The strategy for new organosolv biorefinery presented here was to sequentially remove the extractives before pulping. The products obtained from organosolv pulping of aspen wood with a Lewis acid catalyst were compared to those from processes performed with the same wood and solvent system, but without or with mineral acid as catalyst. The new strategy with Lewis acid catalyst developed in this study proved to allow more efficient recovery of high purity lignin, which was determined to have a high Klason, low sugars, volatiles and ash contents, while preserving a good portion of β‐O‐4 moieties ( 31 P and HSQC NMR), typical for native lignin. The thermal properties of this lignin were determined to be favorable to its transformation by electrospinning. It was successfully spun without need for any additives or modifications before electrospinning experiments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistrySelectSame topicLignin and Wood ChemistryFrench-language works237,207