MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766034242 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23062

Magnetic particles for sugar separation from sulphuric acid solution generated during nano‐crystalline cellulose production

2017· article· en· W2766034242 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Saurabh Jyoti Sarma, M. Ayadi, Sampa Maiti, Satinder Kaur Brar, Richard M. Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCelluForce (Canada)Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsZeta potentialCelluloseSugarChemical engineeringCellulosic ethanolHydrolysisPolymerChemistryNanoparticleAcid hydrolysisMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nano‐crystalline cellulose (NCC) is a renewable material having different applications ranging from drug delivery to a reinforcing filling agent in polymer synthesis. Concentrated sulphuric acid is used to hydrolyze cellulosic biomass to obtain NCC. Manufacturers are keen to reuse the diluted acid solution left after the process. However, the presence of mono and oligosaccharides makes it unsuitable for repeated use. About 99 % of these compounds have been successfully separated from the acid solution by employing NaOH‐treated magnetic particles developed during this investigation. It has been observed that by NaOH treatment, zeta potential of the magnetic particles could be increased from +11 mV to +37.5 mV; correspondingly, sugar removal efficiency was increased from 23.04 % to more than 99 %. Thus a direct correlation between the change in zeta potential of the particles and sugar separation efficiency has been observed.

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207