MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975054846 · doi:10.5539/mas.v1n4p99

The Pre-set Peeling Testing Method of the Hydroetangling Wood Pulp-PET Fiber Composite Web Materials

2007· article· en· W1975054846 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhao Si

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulp (tooth)Raw materialMaterials scienceComposite materialPulp and paper industryComposite numberComputer scienceDentistryEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydroetangling wood pulp-PET fiber web, which is an excellent wipe material. But some fate short coming-particle peeling, arising when it used as wipes, and the peeling particle would do harm to some devices. Therefore, this case even worse when the fabric damping. The four pre-set peeling tests have been signed for this phenomenon, which have imitated some situations of the pre-set peeling under the mechanics functions. The statistics from these tests, combined the analyzing of the different raw materials and processes of the hydroetangling wood pulp-PET fiber web, are regular and convincible. So it is indicate that the pre-set peeling conditions can be explained well by these four testing methods, which are reasonable and feasible.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207