CELLULOSE SHEETS MADE FROM MICRO/NANOFIBRILLATED FIBERS OF BAMBOO, JUTE AND EUCALYPTUS CELLULOSE PULPS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the properties of cellulose sheets made from fibrillated micro/nanofibrils of bamboo, jute and eucalyptus.Micro/nanofibrils obtained from alkaline-treated jute had higher crystalline fraction (CF) and crystallinity index (CI).The onset degradation temperature (T onset ) was very similar for all the micro/nanofibrils (from 316 o C to 323 o C).Defibrillated cellulose nanofibrils had an average diameter in the range of 30-50 nm.Cellulose sheets made of bamboo and jute micro/nanofibrils had higher bending strength, elastic modulus and energy to break than the sheets made of eucalyptus micro/nanofibrils.Compared to the bamboo and jute samples, the eucalyptus micro/nanofibril suspension had a greater amount of fiber debris, which may have contributed to higher apparent porosity, water adsorption and water solubility of the cellulose sheets.Further development of the mechanical defibrillation process could lower the production costs of micro/nanofibrils and improve the performance of engineered cellulose-based materials.
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".