MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4241471929 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14664291

Effect of Intermediate Washing on Ozonolysis Delignification and Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Wheat Straw

2021· preprint· en· W4241471929 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Kamel H. Al jibouri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrawChemistryLigninHydrolysisEnzymatic hydrolysisYield (engineering)OzonolysisOzoneAgronomyPulp and paper industryBiochemistryOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceInorganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheat straw was pretreated with ozone to increase the enzymatic hydrolysis yield. Ozonolysis pretreatment was performed in two stages with an intermediate washing step with water in between. Part of the delignification products (lignin fragments) were removed by a washing step so ozone was used to oxidize more lignin rather than oxidizing lignin fragments. Three parameters, i.e. Initial Water Content (IWC) in wheat straw, Washing Starting Time (WST), and Washing Contact Time (WCT), were optimized to minimize Acid Insoluble Lignin (AIL) content of ozonated wheat straw. Performing an experiment using optimal parameters' values, i.e. IWC equal to 45 wt. %, WST equal to 20 minutes and WCT equal to 80 seconds, showed a drop in AIL content to 9.35 % with an increase in enzymatic hydrolysis yield to 80 % of the theoretical. Readjusting water content of wheat straw to 45 % before performing the 2nd ozonolysis stage further reduced AIL content to 7.36 % and increased the hydrolysis yield to 90 %. Increasing wheat straw fiber size from < 2 mm to < 6 mm decreased the hydrolysis yield to 72 %. All results were considered significant improvements when compared to untreated wheat straw with AIL content of 20.5 % and hydrolysis yield of 23 %.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiofuel production and bioconversion→French-language works237,207→