Fabrication of regenerated cellulose fibers using phosphoric acid plus hydrogen peroxide treated wheat straw in DMAc/LiCl solvent system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Regenerated cellulose fibers (RCFs) are widely used biodegradable and eco-friendly materials made from woody biomass to replace synthetic fibers. This work explored the feasibility of fabricating RCFs using phosphoric acid plus hydrogen peroxide (PHP) treated wheat straw in N,N-dimethylacetamide/lithium chloride (DMAc/LiCl) solvent system. The effect of upstream pretreatment conditions on the obtained cellulose-enriched fraction (CEF), the solubility of CEF in DMAc/LiCl, the RCFs’ mechanical properties, and the interfacial interaction of residual lignin were systematically studied. CEF could be completely dissolved in DMAc/LiCl, and its wet-spun RCFs own tensile strength of 184 MPa, the toughness of 25 MJ/m3, and it demonstrated remarkable wet-strength (84 MPa), wet-toughness (11 MJ/m3), and dyeing properties. The existence of residual lignin negatively affected its mechanical properties but would enhance its resistance to water infiltration. The present work provides a new approach for producing RCFs from woody biomass.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".