MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281790598 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2022-0041

Analysis of lignins using <sup>31</sup>P benchtop NMR spectroscopy: quantitative assessment of substructures and comparison to high-field NMR

2022· article· en· W4281790598 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Juan F. Araneda, Ian W. Burton, Michael Paleologou, Susanne D. Riegel, Matthew C. Leclerc

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLigninChemistryCharacterization (materials science)Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyCarbon-13 NMRHigh resolutionBiomass (ecology)Biochemical engineeringOrganic chemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lignin is quickly emerging as a biomass-derived source for the production of some crucial organic chemistry building blocks, typically obtained from unsustainable and non-renewable petroleum feedstocks. As a complex polymer, lignin characterization is often challenging due to its random structure and multitudes of different repeating substructures. Over the last 20 years, advances in our understanding and processing of lignin, as well as important work on its characterization using 31P NMR, have led to numerous publications highlighting the many potential uses of this material. With the emergence of high-resolution benchtop NMR instruments, these types of analyses can now be accessed by many laboratories and industries that have historically not been able to take advantage of NMR due to cost or size constraints. Herein, we demonstrate that benchtop NMR is a viable technique for the 31P NMR analysis of lignin and compare our results to those obtained on a traditional high-field instrument.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicLignin and Wood ChemistryFrench-language works237,207