Investigation of Eggshell Membrane Removal With Two Different Treatment Methods
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
Chicken eggshells (ESs) consist of 96%–97% calcium carbonate, while about 3%–4% consists of organic substances, mainly in the form of protein‐based membranes and occluded organic matter. Recently, ESs have been studied as a filler in polymer composite materials, which represents an innovative solution to address ES valorization. In this study, thermal and chemical treatments were investigated for membrane removal since the membrane may alter various properties when the ES fillers are added to the composite material. A nanoindentation method was used to measure changes in the ES mechanical properties. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), and Fourier‐transform infrared (FT‐IR) spectroscopy were used to characterize the ES membrane removal through chemical treatment. The results showed that even at a heating temperature of 100°C, the ES mechanical properties were negatively affected, while a low concentration of bleach solution (25% bleach solution and 10 min of holding time) was able to remove the membrane without reducing the ES mechanical properties. The chemical treatment method offers a means for ES membrane removal while conserving the quality of the mineral fraction (calcite; CaCO 3 ).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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