Mechanical Character of Typica1 Plant Leaf Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hardness of typical plant leaves surfaces was investigated and analyzed by nano-hardness tester. Results show that the mechanical character of varied texture and varied surface morphologies shows regularity. The hardness of coriaceous fresh leaves (Bambusa phyllostachys pubescens etc.) and ligneous leaves is great. Waxiness leaves′ hardness (such as Nelumbo nucifera Gaertn, Canna indica Linn (generalis) is little. The hardness of convex morphology part is better than that of concave morphology part on non-smooth morphology leaf surfaces. And that the hardness of surface layer is better than that of internal layer in the same leaf. This study may be important biological foundation for design and fabrication of bionic engineering surface and composite materials. Key words: engineering bionic; plant leaf; hardness; mechanical character
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".