Waste Coffee Ground Biochar: A Material for Humidity Sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Worldwide consumption of coffee exceeds 11 billion tons/year. Used coffee grounds end up as landfill. However, the unique structural properties of its porous surface make coffee grounds popular for the adsorption of gaseous molecules. In the present work, we demonstrate the use of coffee grounds as a potential and cheap source for biochar carbon. The produced coffee ground biochar (CGB) was investigated as a sensing material for developing humidity sensors. CGB was fully characterized by using laser granulometry, X-ray diffraction (XRD), Raman spectroscopy, field emission-scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and the Brunnauer Emmett Teller (BET) technique in order to acquire a complete understanding of its structural and surface properties and composition. Subsequently humidity sensors were screen printed using an ink-containing CGB with polyvinyl butyral (PVB) acting as a temporary binder and ethylene glycol monobutyral ether, Emflow, as an organic vehicle so that the proper rheological characteristics were achieved. Screen-printed films were the heated at 300℃ in air. Humidity tests were performed under a flow of 1.7 L/min in the relative humidity range 0⁻100% at room temperature. The initial impedance of the film was 25.2 0.15 MΩ which changes to 12.3 MΩ under 98% humidity exposure. A sensor response was observed above 20 % relative humidity (RH). Both the response and recovery times were reasonably fast (less than 2 min).
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".