Investigation of low consistency reject refining of mechanical pulp for energy savings
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, the effects of low consistency refining (LCR) energy and intensity on mechanical pulp properties have been studied for three different types of reject pulps (softwood TMP, softwood CTMP and hardwood CTMP), which were refined at varying intensity. Resulting pulp properties have been compared with high consistency refining (HCR) of the same reject pulps. For all furnish types, it was shown that LCR can develop pulp properties matching those developed through HCR with significantly less energy. The resulting pulp properties were found to be affected not only by refining intensity and energy, but also by initial fibre morphology. Pilot LCR trials demonstrated that high freeness reject pulp is initially insensitive to refining intensity as specific energy is applied. This enables the first stage of LCR to be carried out at a higher specific energy and intensity, which can reduce the number of stages of LCR required to reach a target quality. This work shows that low intensity LCR is capable of achieving the same tensile index as HCR pulp at a target freeness of 200 ml CSF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it