Analysis of polydisperse polymer adsorption on porous cellulose fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The adsorption of cationic water-soluble polymers onto negatively charged porous wood pulp fibers is an essential aspect of papermaking. Adsorption data can be displayed as a direct plot of the amount adsorbed, Γ, versus the amount of polymer added or as an isotherm plot showing the amount adsorbed versus the residual unadsorbed polymer. In either data presentation, the analysis is more transparent if the units of each axis are the same (e.g., mg/g or meq/g), giving dimensionless slopes. Values for Γmax, ΓI, f I , and Γme can be extracted from many isotherms where: Γmax is the maximum capacity of the fibers to adsorb polymer; ΓI is the y-axis isotherm intercept and gives the maximum dose that can be fully adsorbed; f I is the slope of the direct plot at ΓI, and f I is the mass fraction of the added polymer that can access interior (pore) surfaces; and, Γme is the saturated amount of polymer adsorbed on exterior surfaces. Additionally, the molecular weight distribution of the adsorbing polymer in conjunction with the adsorption isotherm can be used to estimate the molecular weight distributions of adsorbed polymer on interior and exterior fiber surfaces as functions of the polymer dose.
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 | 0.001 | 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".