Evaluation of Nanofiltration Membranes for the Purification of Monosaccharides: Influence of pH, Temperature, and Sulfates on the Solute Retention and Fouling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Furfural, acetic acid, and sulfates are found in the hemicellulose (HMC) fraction of lignocellulosic biomass. Separation of furfural, acetic acid, and sulfates from monosaccharides by four nanofiltration (NF) membranes was evaluated with a model solution of glucose, xylose, furfural, acetic acid, and sulfates. Results showed that Alfa Laval NF99HF is the most promising membrane to purify monosaccharides, with the retentions of xylose (85%), glucose (95%), and with the minimum sulfate retention. pH has the highest impact on the retention of all solutes and there is no significant effect of temperature on the retentions of sulphates and acetic acid. Lower pH and temperature are favored to maximize the monosaccharide retention and to remove acetic acid while retaining more furfural with the monosaccharides. Moreover, fouling tendency is maximized at lower pH and higher temperatures. According to the statistical analysis, the retentions of glucose, xylose, furfural, sulfates, and acetic acid are 95%, 90%, 20%, 88%, and 0%, respectively at pH 3 and 25 °C. The presence of sulfates favors the separation of acetic acid and furfural from monosaccharides.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".