MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009746040 · doi:10.1002/adv.20016

Development of an extrusion system for producing fine‐celled HDPE/wood‐fiber composite foams using CO<sub>2</sub>as a blowing agent

2004· article· en· W2009746040 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Polymer Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceExtrusionComposite materialBlowing agentPlastics extrusionComposite numberFiberMixing (physics)MoistureFiller (materials)Polyurethane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents an innovative design of a tandem extrusion system for fine‐celled foaming of plastic/wood‐fiber composites using a physical blowing agent (PBA). The plastic/wood‐fiber composites utilize wood‐fibers (WF) as a reinforcing filler in the plastic matrix and are known to be advantageous over the neat plastics in terms of the materials cost and some improved mechanical properties such as stiffness and strength. However, these improvements are usually accompanied by sacrifices in the ductility and impact resistance. These shortcomings can be reduced by inducing fine‐celled or microcellular foaming in these composites, thereby creating a new class of materials with unique properties. An innovative tandem extrusion system with continuous on‐line moisture removal and PBA injection was successfully developed. The foamed composites, produced on the tandem extrusion system, were compared with those produced on a single extruder system, and demonstrated significant improvement in cell morphology, resulting from uniform mixing and effective moisture removal. The effects of WF and coupling agent (CA) on the cell morphology were studied. An increase in the WF content had an adverse affect. The cell morphology and foam structures were improved when an appropriate CA was added. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Adv Polym Techn 23: 263–276, 2004; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/adv.20016

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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