PAPER STRAWS: AN INVESTIGATION INTO SURFACE MODIFICATION AND HYDROPHOBIZATION OF CELLULOSE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to improve the quality of paper straws, experiments involving the hydrophobization of paper, in a silylation reaction with chloro(dimethyl)octadecylsilane using various solvents, were conducted. The ImageJ program was used to quantify hydrophobicity by calculating the contact angle between a water droplet and a small piece of paper, which were compared between treatment groups as well as with untreated paper and plastic straws. Samples were exposed to a variety of liquids in one-hour periods for a total of six hours. After each hour, contact angle measurements were taken. Results suggested that hydrophobicity declines with time due to leaching of silanol from the treated paper. Contact angles between water droplets and the treated paper remained larger than that of untreated paper straws throughout testing, indicating higher hydrophobicity. Furthermore, samples that were silylated using dioxane as a solvent were better able to maintain hydrophobicity than samples silylated using toluene as a solvent.
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".