MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969590427 · doi:10.1139/x03-173

Estimation of the physical wood properties of green <i>Pinus taeda</i> radial samples by near infrared spectroscopy

2003· article· en· W1969590427 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
L R Schimleck, Christian Mora, Richard F. Daniels

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoblolly pinePinus <genus>Water contentNear-infrared spectroscopySpectroscopyMoistureStiffnessCorrelation coefficientEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryBotanyMathematicsComposite materialGeologyPhysicsChromatographyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy to the green wood of radial samples (simulated increment cores) and the development of calibrations for the prediction of wood properties are described. Twenty Pinus taeda L. (loblolly pine) radial strips were characterized in terms of air-dry density, microfibril angle (MFA), and stiffness. NIR spectra were obtained in 10-mm steps from the radial longitudinal and transverse faces of each sample and used to develop calibrations for each property. NIR spectra were collected when the wood was green (moisture content ranged from approximately 100% to 154%) and dried to approximately 7% moisture content. Relationships between measured and NIR estimates for green wood were good; coefficients of determination (R2) ranged from 0.79 (MFA) to 0.85 (air-dry density). Differences between calibrations developed using the radial longitudinal and transverse faces were small. Calibrations were tested on an independent set. Predictive errors were relatively large for some green samples and relationships were moderate; R2p ranged from 0.67 (MFA) to 0.81 (stiffness). Dry wood calibrations demonstrated strong predictive relationships with R2p ranging from 0.87 (air-dry density) to 0.95 (stiffness). NIR spectroscopy has the potential to predict the air-dry density, MFA, and stiffness of 10-mm sections of green P. taeda wood samples.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations122
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207