Processing and Properties of Biodegradable Polymer Blends Based on Gelatinized Potato Starch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ii The development of environmental friendly polymers from renewable resources, specifically for short term packaging and disposable applications, has been recognized as an important alternative to synthetic polymer based packaging materials. In this work, we focus particularly on the use of potato starch, because there is a significantly large by-product stream of potato starch from potato waste after food processing in Canada. Poor processability and flowability are the main restrictions against the application of starch in granular form. Hence, thermoplastic starch (TPS) has been developed using starch in the presence of water and other plasticizers (e.g. glycerol) typically by using heat and shear. A microcompounder extruder was used for blending TPS, with an injection molding machine to prepare samples for testing. The sample test results show that TPS has severe limitations due to poor mechanical properties and high water sensitivity. To overcome the mentioned weaknesses, while maintaining material biodegradability, one method is to blend TPS with a high performance biodegradable polymer. Poly lactic acid (PLA)
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".