Influences of mechanical activation and tartaric acid addition on the efficiency of B4C synthesis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, mechanical activation and tartaric acid addition were employed to reduce the residual carbon and intensify the efficiency of B4C synthesis using glucose and boric acid as starting materials. To investigate the role of mechanical activation on synthesis performance, one sample was subjected to high-energy ball milling before pyrolysis and the other after pyrolysis. To study the role of additives, in the precursor production stage, on synthesis efficiency and residual carbon reduction, different amounts of tartaric acid (0, 5, 10, 25, and 50 wt%) were tested. FT-IR and XRD analyses were used to characterize the bonds created in the precursors and the phases formed during the pyrolysis and synthesis steps, respectively. The results confirmed that mechanical activation before synthesis can improve the synthesis efficiency, but ball milling before pyrolysis did not significantly affect the final synthesis product. The addition of tartaric acid enhanced the formation of B–C bonds; hence, it increased the efficiency of B4C synthesis. The optimum additive amount was 25 wt% and higher amounts weakened the synthesis performance.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it