MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979580178 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.9b03078

<i>110th Anniversary:</i> High-Molecular-Weight Chitin and Cellulose Hydrogels from Biomass in Ionic Liquids without Chemical Crosslinking

2019· article· en· W2979580178 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Bertón, Xiaoping Shen, Robin D. Rogers, Julia L. Shamshina

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersOffice of ScienceChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsCelluloseSelf-healing hydrogelsChitinIonic liquidPolymer scienceChemical engineeringBiomass (ecology)ChemistryPolymer chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryChitosanCatalysisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellulose, chitin, and composite 3D hydrogels and membranes were fabricated without any chemical modification from high-molecular-weight chitin and cellulose-rich material (CRM) extracted from shrimp shell or poplar wood, respectively, using the ionic liquid (IL) 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate ([C 2 mim][OAc]). The hydrogels were prepared by redissolution of the extracted biopolymers in the same IL, or in a one-pot process directly from a solution of the biomass after extraction, followed by molding/gelation (“3D gels”) or casting (membranes), and then washing. For comparison, the preparation of gels was attempted using commercial microcrystalline cellulose or chitin. From all of the sources, the regenerated CRM or chitin required significantly lower load. Hydrogels were also converted to aerogels via transformation to alcogels and then Sc-CO 2 drying, giving materials of low density, high porosity, favorable compressibility, high water uptake, and moderate antioxidant activity. Air-dried membranes were dense, of high tensile strength, and exhibited high water-vapor transmission.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.016

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207