Comparison of two bar edge lengths of refining plates on the properties of American old corrugated container pulp during low consistency refining
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commercial American old corrugated container pulp (AOCC) boards were used as the starting material for repulping and low consistency (LC) refining to investigate the effects of LC refining plate geometry on the fibre and strength properties of the generated pulp. Specific refining energy that ranged from 0 to 120 kWh/air-dried ton (ADT) of pulp was explored for the two bar edge lengths (BEL) of refining plate patterns, wide 0.99 km/rev BEL and interim 2.01 km/rev BEL. The results showed that fibre length, curl index, kink index, and pulp freeness decreased while fines content increased with increasing refining energy input for both of the two refining plates during LC refining. LC refining with 2.01 BEL plate at low intensity of 0.24 J/m showed less fibre length reduction and more tensile strength development than that obtained with 0.99 BEL plate at high intensity of 0.48 J/m when compared at the same specific energy. Moreover, to achieve the desired tensile strength of the AOCC pulp, lower energy was needed for the interim 2.01 BEL plate than the wide 0.99 BEL plate. Thus, the interim 2.01 km/rev BEL refining plate provided potential for saving refining energy to reach a desired tensile strength of AOCC pulp.
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) | 0.002 | 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".