MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987719760

Triticale starch based bioplastics

2011· article· en· W6987719760 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriticaleStarchBiorefineryBioplasticRaw materialBiomass (ecology)Maize starch
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triticale is being developed and aimed as an industrial crop and biorefinery feedstock for the Canadian manufacturing industry within the CTBI network (The Canadian Triticale Biorefinery Initiative). The fundamental understanding of the triticale starch and TPS (thermoplastic starch) properties will greatly help the development of triticale starch-based materials with improved properties. In this paper the potential of triticale starch for the TPS/polymer blend fabrication was explored and compared with wheat starch in terms of starch morphology, crystallization structure, and TPS rheological properties. Very similar results were obtained for the triticale starch comparing with the wheat starch. This confirms that studies made with wheat starch should be directly applicable to triticale. The possibility of using triticale to make 100% biobased blown film was investigated using a small lab-scale blown film line. Film thickness of 25 μm was obtained successfully for the triticale starch based PLA/TPS blends, in which sorbitol/glycerol mixture was used as plasticizers for TPS and 2% CESA chain extender to chain extend PLA in the blends. The successful development of the triticale starch based bio-materials will rapidly and significantly increase the net usages of biomass resources based on triticale, promote valued products and increase the sustainable development in the agricultural sector in Canada.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207