MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104936382 · doi:10.1177/1744259107079143

Hygroscopic Behavior of Paper and Books

2007· article· en· W2104936382 on OpenAlexaff
Hannelore Derluyn, Hans Janßen, Jfl Jan Diepens, Dominique Derome, J. Carmeliet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater vaporMoistureDesorptionMaterials scienceAir permeability specific surfaceHumiditySorptionRelative humidityAdsorptionWater contentPermeability (electromagnetism)Composite materialThermal effusivityEnvironmental scienceThermodynamicsChemistryMeteorologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsLayer (electronics)Heat transferMembranePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents experimental analysis and numerical modeling of hygroscopic moisture buffering by paper and books. First, a literature review of moisture transport properties of paper is presented. Experimental work on two paper types includes SEM analysis of the paper structure, determination of sorption isotherms and water vapor permeability measurements. A hysteretic model for paper is presented, which is based on the measurement of the main adsorption and desorption curves. It is shown that the water vapor permeability in a hysteretic model is dependent on the moisture content and not on the relative humidity. Books consist of several paper sheets with air layers between the sheets. To take the air layers into account, a parallel transport model is proposed to determine the effective moisture transport properties of books taking into account the air layers. The dynamic hygroscopic behavior of small book samples was measured. It is shown that, although the water vapor permeability of different paper types can be quite different, the effusivity of a book highly depends on the presence of the air layers and can therefore remain comparable for different paper types.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building PhysicsSame topicMaterial Properties and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207