Processes and Challenges for the Manufacturing of Lyocell Fibres with Alternative Agricultural Feedstocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lyocell man-made cellulosic fibres (L-MMCF) have been commercially available since the mid-1990’s, with the typical feedstock prepared from tree pulp or cotton linters. In recent years, there have been advancements in the utilisation of high alpha-cellulose agricultural biomass for L-MMCF feedstock. Industrial hemp stalks offer a unique opportunity for L-MMCF since hemp is considered an environmentally conscious crop that can also help to bridge the gap in worldwide cellulose shortages; additionally, industrial hemp stalks are high in alpha-cellulose, making this an ideal feedstock for L-MMCF manufacturing. This review paper outlines the lyocell process in detail, including processes for preparation of feedstocks, pulp processing, removal of contaminants and nonessential plant components, pulp dissolution, dope preparation, and fibre spinning. Opportunities and challenges associated with the utilisation of industrial hemp stalks as an alternative feedstock are addressed through all steps of the manufacturing process. Incorporating alternative feedstock opens new perspectives for manufacturing sustainable L-MMCF.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".