A simple and tailor‐made fabrication of porous silicon carbide from functionalized kraft pulp paper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Porous silicon carbide (SiC) materials were fabricated using the polymer‐derived ceramics method with kraft pulp papers (KPP) and a commercial polycarbosilane, the allylhydridopolycarbosilane (AHPCS), as starting materials. For this, KPP, propargylated KPP, or phosphorylated KPP were used to be impregnated by the AHPCS, with or without Karstedt catalyst. The pyrolysed materials were characterized at different stages, by using thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) coupled with mass spectrometry, X‐ray diffraction (XRD), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Depending on the nature of the initial template, various architectured SiC ceramics were successfully obtained with adjustable porosities. The key role of the previous functionalization of the papers was highlighted in terms of interactions at the interface between the polymer and the lignocellulosic handsheets. It led to either replica or sacrificial template methods. Thus, it was possible to tune the open porosity of the porous carbon and β‐SiC materials between 14.8% and 92.9%, with ceramic yields varying from 12% to 71%.
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 | 0.000 |
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".