Effect of Commercial Cationic Starch on Paper Properties Made from Recycled Pulp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production of packaging paper is growing steadily annually globally. Packaging paper such as liner paper and medium paper are mainly made from recycled pulp. The strength of pulp deteriorated over the cycle of recycling. To ensure the packaging paper strength produced from recycled paper is up to par, the additive is mandatory. Starch is one of the common and economical additives used in papermaking. In this research, the performance of commercial cationic starch as an additive in packaging papermaking is evaluated. 4 different percentages of starch, including 2%, 4%, 6%, and 8%, were studied. Five replicates of 60gsm hand sheets were produced for each level, and 0% was introduced as a control. The properties such as thickness, Canadian Standard Freeness Test, Cobb test, tensile index, folding endurance, and tear index were evaluated according to the TAPPI Standard. From the result, an 8% dosage of this commercial cationic starch exhibited the best performance in mechanical tests without compromising the drainage of water significantly.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".