MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093487422 · doi:10.5539/jas.v2n4p139

Estimation of the Cellulose Microfibril Angle in Acacia mangium Wood Using Small-Angle X-Ray Scattering

2010· article· en· W2093487422 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tamer A. Tabet, Fauziah Abdul Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Malaysia SabahUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
KeywordsMicrofibrilSmall-angle X-ray scatteringMaterials scienceScatteringIntensity (physics)CelluloseComposite materialCrystallographyOpticsGeometryChemistryMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term microfibril angle, MFA in wood science refers to the angle between the direction of the helicalwindings of cellulose microfibrils in the secondary cell wall, S2 layer of fibres and the long axis of the cell wall.A method is presented for the measurement, using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), of the microfibril angle,(MFA) and the associated standard deviation for the cellulose microfibrils in the S2 layer of the cell walls ofAcacia mangium wood. The length and orientation of the microfibrils of the cell walls in the irradiated volume ofthe thin samples are measured using SAXS and scanning electron microscope, (SEM). The undeterminedparameters in the analysis are the MFA, (M) and the standard deviation (σ?) of the intensity distribution arisingfrom the wandering of the fibril orientation about the mean value. Nine separate pairs of values are determinedfor nine different values of the angle of the incidence of the X-ray beam relative to the normal to the radialdirection in the sample. The results show good agreement. The curve distribution of scattered intensity for thereal cell wall structure is compared with that calculated with that assembly of rectangular cells with the sameratio of transverse to radial cell wall length. It is demonstrated that for β = 45° (where β is the angle between theplane face of the wood samples and the radial direction) the peaks in the curve intensity distribution for the realand the rectangular cells coincide. If this peak position is ?45, Then the MFA can be determined from the relationM = tan-1 (tan ?45 / cos 45°), which is precise for rectangular cells.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207