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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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 (R 2 ) 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; R 2 p ranged from 0.67 (MFA) to 0.81 (stiffness). Dry wood calibrations demonstrated strong predictive relationships with R 2 p 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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

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)0.0000.000

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