Cotton-based flame-retardant textiles: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biodegradable textiles made from cellulose, the most abundant biopolymer, have gained attention from researchers, due to the ease with which cellulose can be chemically modified to introduce multifunctional groups, and because of its renewable and biodegradable nature. One of the most attractive features required for civilian and military applications of textiles is flame-retardancy. This review focuses on various methods employed for the fabrication of cellulose-based flame-retardant cotton textiles along with their developed flame-retardant properties over the last few years. The most common method is to merge N, S, P, and Si-based polymeric, non-polymeric, polymeric/non-polymeric hybrids, inorganic, and organic/inorganic hybrids with cellulose to fabricate flame-retardant cotton textiles. In these studies, cellulose was chemically bonded with the flame-retardants or in some cases, cotton textiles were coated by flame-retardants. The flame-retardant properties of the cotton textiles were investigated and determined by various methods, including the limiting oxygen index (LOI), the vertical flame test, thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA), and by cone calorimetry. This review demonstrates the potential of cellulose-based flame-retardant textiles for various applications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".