MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cannabis as a Feedstock for the Production of Chemicals, Fuels, and Materials: A Review of Relevant Studies To Date

2021· review· en· W3137127177 on OpenAlexafffund
Francisco Pascual Gomez, Jinguang Hu, Matthew A. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGABA and Rice Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsRaw materialBioproductsCannabisAgricultureBiofuelSustainabilityCommodity chemicalsRenewable energyProduction (economics)Fossil fuelBiomass (ecology)Renewable fuelsNatural resource economicsBusinessWaste managementBiotechnologyEngineeringEnvironmental scienceEconomicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As societies place greater emphasis on sustainability, there is a move toward creating a circular economy in which renewable resources, such as agriculture and forestry residues, serve as feedstocks in the production of energy and chemicals. One emerging agricultural commodity that may potentially serve as a feedstock for numerous chemicals and materials is cannabis. For most of the last one hundred years the use of cannabis as a biomass feedstock has been all but impossible, due to its legal status. However, over the last 20 years the changing legal status of cannabis has resulted in a large number of studies which have investigated cannabis as a feedstock for diverse bioproducts, including polymers, pulp, and biofuels. Being a relatively new agricultural commodity, the literature on chemicals, fuels, and materials derived from cannabis is spread across numerous disparate disciplines, such as engineering, agriculture, chemistry, and biology. Thus, the purpose of this review is to compile and summarize the relevant studies that illustrate the use of cannabis as a feedstock in the production of chemicals, fuels, and materials as well as to highlight the challenges and possibilities for future research opportunities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicGABA and Rice ResearchFrench-language works237,207