MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898964332 · doi:10.1515/npprj-2018-0014

Recycled fiber treated with NaOH/urea aqueous solution: effects on physical properties of paper sheets and on hornification

2018· article· en· W2898964332 on OpenAlexaff
Yingju Miao, Yunfei Zhi, Heng Zhang, Ying Chen, Shaoyun Shan, Qingming Jia, Yonghao Ni

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersGuizhou Science and Technology DepartmentNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSwellingMaterials scienceFiberCelluloseAqueous solutionComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthCellulose fiberPulp (tooth)Hydrogen bondUreaWater retentionChemical engineeringChemistryOrganic chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hydrogen bonding among fiber microfibrils is the primary cause of fiber hornification, wherein NaOH/urea aqueous solution precooled to −13 °C can disassemble inter- and intramolecular hydrogen bonds. Whether hornified fibers treated with this process can significantly improve fiber swelling ability and physical properties of the resulting paper sheets remains a problem. In this investigation, the 6th cycle fiber was pretreated with this procedure, and the water retention value of the fiber before and after treatment and the physical properties of the resulting paper sheets were studied. The results indicate that the lignin decline, complete swelling of flat fiber, filling of cellulose film between the interfiber network, and decreasing crystalline region all contribute to the increase in water retention value. The water retention value of repaired fiber is equivalent to that of virgin pulp, and hornification reverses by 89 %. In addition, the cellulose film filling among the fiber network constructs a similar reinforced concrete structure, which causes the tear, burst, and tensile index of the resulting paper sheets to increase by 145 %, 98 %, and 43 %, respectively.

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 score0.004

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNordic Pulp & Paper Research JournalSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207