MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907297190

Within-Stem Variation in Wood Properties of Red Pine ( Pinus Resinosa AIT.)

2012· article· en· W1907297190 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cheng Zhou, Ying Hei Chui, Meng Gong

Bibliographic record

VenueWood and Fiber Science (Society of Wood Science and Technology) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPithComposite materialRed pineUltimate tensile strengthSoftwoodPinus <genus>Materials scienceTension (geology)Bark (sound)PerpendicularPulpwoodShear (geology)BotanyPulp and paper industryMathematicsBiologyGeometryEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some physical and mechanical properties, including tension parallel-to-grain, tension perpendicular-to-grain, and shear parallel-to-grain, and their variations within the tree stem of red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) were evaluated in this study. All these wood properties were obtained based on small clear specimens. Results indicate that wood properties tended to increase from pith to bark in the radial direction and decrease from bottom to top in the longitudinal direction. These variations in wood properties can be mainly attributed to the differences in wood characteristics of juvenile and mature wood. The influence of growth ring orientation was not statistically significant on shear strength parallel-to-grain and tensile strength perpendicular-to-grain. Information on variation in mechanical properties of wood across a tree stem is essential to investigate the influence of sawing pattern on mechanical properties of lumber products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.182 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWood and Fiber Science (Society of Wood Science and Technology)Same topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207