Deacidification of acidic books and paper by means of non-aqueous dispersions of alkaline particles: A review focusing on completeness of the reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deacidification refers to chemical treatments meant to slow down the acid hydrolysis and embrittlement of books and paper documents that had been printed on acidic paper. From the early 1800s up to about 1990, papermakers used aluminum sulfate, an acidic compound, in most printing papers. Certain deacidification methods use non-aqueous media to distribute alkaline mineral particles such as MgO within the pages of the treated books. Evidence is considered here as to whether or not the proximity of alkaline particles within such documents is sufficient to neutralize the acidic species present. Because much evidence suggests incomplete neutralization, a second focus concerns what to do next in cases where books already have been treated with a non-aqueous dispersion system. Based on the literature, the neutralization of acidic species within such paper can be completed by partial moistening, by high humidity and pressure, by water condensation, as well as by optional treatments to enhance paper strength and a final drying step.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".