Synthesis and characterization of glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) grafted eucalyptus fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graft-copolymerization of bleached kraft eucalyptus fibers was carried out with glycidyl methacrylate monomer by using Fe 2+ -thiourea dioxide-H 2 O 2 as an initiator system. The cellulose-poly(glycidyl methacrylate) graft copolymers (CPGMA) were characterized via Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), scanning electron microscope (SEM), 13 C cross polarization magic angle spinning NMR spectra ( 13 C CP/MAS NMR), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA). Results showed the grafting percent was from 0 to 244%, the epoxy group content from 0 to 4.37 mmol/g, and the grafting efficiency over 97%, when the grafting percent exceeded 38%. Additionally, the morphological analysis denoted that the grafting not only took place on the fiber surface, but also inside the fiber wall. Both FTIR and solid state 13 C CP/MAS NMR analysis identified the occurrence of grafting. Fiber crystallinity was strongly affected by the percent grafting, decreasing from 69.8% (eucalyptus pulp) to 26.2% at the percent grafting of 198%. TGA analytical data indicated that GMA grafting resulted in the reduction of thermal stability of eucalyptus fibers at the percent grafting of 198%.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".