MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012612158 · doi:10.1155/2011/179023

Modifications Caused by Enzyme-Retting and Their Effect on Composite Performance

2011· article· en· W2012612158 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jonn A. Foulk, Denis Rho, M. Alcock, Chad A. Ulven, Shanshan Huo

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Materials Science and Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsOrthopaedic Innovation CentreNational Research Council CanadaBiotechnology Research Institute
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAgricultural Research ServiceClemson UniversityNorth Dakota State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsRettingMaterials scienceComposite numberComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthFiberWaxThermosetting polymerStrawEpoxyPulp and paper industryAgronomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bethune seed flax was collected from Canada with seed removed using a stripper header and straw pulled and left in field for several weeks. Unretted straw was decorticated providing a coarse fiber bundle feedstock for enzyme treatments. Enzyme treatments using a bacterial pectinolytic enzyme with lyase activity were conducted in lab-scale reactors. Four fiber specimens were created: no retting, minimal retting, moderate retting, and full retting. Fiber characterization tests: strength, elongation, diameter, metal content, wax content, and pH were conducted with significant differences between fibers. Thermosetting vinyl ester resin was used to produce composite panels via vacuum-assisted infusion. Composite performance was evaluated using fiber bundle pull-out, tensile, impact, and interlaminar shear tests. Composite tests indicate that composite panels are largely unchanged among fiber samples. Variation in composite performance might not be realized due to poor interfacial bonding being of larger impact than the more subtle changes incurred by the enzyme treatment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207