Cr (VI) adsorption from aqueous solutions on grafted chitosan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chitosan was grafted on the surface of a cotton gauze (20, 50, and 100 mg chitosan g−1 cotton) to improve its stability in aqueous solutions. The adsorption of hexavalent chromium ions from water on the grafted chitosan was evaluated to determine, by means of linear and nonlinear models, the kinetic and isotherm adsorption of the process. The kinetics of pseudo second‐order, pseudo first‐order, and adsorption isotherms type II were obtained, that is, a monolayer adsorption on nonporous adsorbents with physical adsorption was present. The most probable energy of adsorption corresponded to a physisorption with hydrogen bond interactions between chromium ions and ammonium groups. Moreover, three different cross‐sectional areas of hexavalent chromium ions were calculated and used to estimate the specific surface area employed by active sites to adsorb metal ions in terms of chitosan or cotton mass. Finally, the percentage of the area occupied by chromium ions on the surface was estimated by dividing the resulting specific surface area in terms of cotton mass by the specific surface area of cotton reported in literature. As a result, it was determined that the occupied area is between 6% (for 20 mg chitosan g−1 cotton)‐24% (for 100 mg chitosan g−1 cotton) from the total area of cotton.
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".