MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234980943 · doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-268-7_5

Updates on Softwood-to-Ethanol Process Development

2007· book-chapter· en· W4234980943 on OpenAlexaff
Warren Mabee, David J. Gregg, Claudio Arato, Alex Berlin, Renata Bura, Neil R. Gilkes, Olga Mirochnik, Xuejun Pan, Erica Pye, John N. Saddler

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganosolvSoftwoodLigninPulp and paper industrySteam explosionBioconversionRaw materialChemistryWaste managementFermentationOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Softwoods are generally considered to be one of the most difficult lignocellulosic feedstocks to hydrolyze to sugars for fermentation, primarily owing to the nature and amount of lignin. If the inhibitory effect of lignin can be significantly reduced, softwoods may become a more useful feedstock for the bioconversion processes. Moreover, strategies developed to reduce problems with softwood lignin may also provide a means to enhance the processing of other lignocellulosic substrates. The Forest Products Biotechnology Group at the University of British Columbia has been developing softwood-to-ethanol processes with SO 2 -catalyzed steam explosion and ethanol organosolv pretreatments. Lignin from the steam explosion process has relatively low reactivity and, consequently, low product value, compared with the high-value coproduct that can be obtained through organosolv. The technical and economic challenges of both processes are presented, together with suggestions for future process development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.043

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207