Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functionally graded materials (FGM) are characterized by a gradual change in the volume fractions of two or more components as a function of position along certain dimensions. FGM has been introduced as an alternative to laminated composites where a mismatch in properties across each layer interface is the origin of stress concentration and a source of delamination/failure. In addition, the use of natural wood fibres as reinforcement has the advantage of easy manufacturing, low cost, biodegradability, negligible health hazards and high specific properties. Using short fibres in a controlled manner to produce functionally graded composites can provide more balanced properties and lead to improved stiffness/strength properties across thickness. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the mechanical behavior of functionally graded natural fibre composites. To study the effect of composite property variation, the functionally graded composite is divided into a number of homogeneous layers in order to evaluate the mechanical behavior. In particular, the effect wood fibre content variation across thickness on the tensile properties of the composites is presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".