Mechanical recycling of poly(lactic acid)/agave fiber biocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on evaluating the mechanical recycling potential of poly(lactic acid) (PLA) biocomposites reinforced with agave fibers (AF). The biocomposites were prepared by extrusion using 5, 15, and 30 wt.% of agave fibers and reprocessed up to eight times. The results show that the fiber dimensions substantially decrease during reprocessing, especially after the first extrusion cycle, followed by a more gradual decrease in each subsequent cycle. The melt flow index (MFI) and the mechanical properties (except impact strength) tend to decrease as the fiber concentration increases. On the other hand, the glass transition temperature ( T g ) and the crystallinity ( X c ) of the biocomposites increased with increasing fiber concentration. It is important to highlight that closed-loop reprocessing does not significantly affect the overall behavior of the biocomposites under the conditions investigated. Therefore, PLA reinforced with AF is suitable for primary recycling since the final properties are mainly influenced by the fiber concentration and less by the number of reprocessing cycles.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".