MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132808648 · doi:10.4271/2010-01-2026

Impact of Fiber Loading on Injection Molding Processing Parameter and Properties of Biocomposite

2010· article· en· W2132808648 on OpenAlexafffund
Satya Panigrahi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International journal of commercial vehicles · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsBiocompositeMaterials scienceMolding (decorative)FiberComposite materialComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The research on using natural fibres as the reinforcement in plastic composites has increased dramatically in the last few years. Flax fibres are renewable resources with low specific mass, reduced energy consumption, and relatively low in cost. These advantages make flax fibres recognized as a potential replacement for glass fibres in composites. Among plastic, polyethylene was concluded to be a suitable material used as matrix in natural fibre reinforced biocomposites. However there are few studies on this area so far. In this paper, the processing method of flax fibre-reinforced polyethylene biocomposites is introduced. Flax fibre polyethylene biocomposite consists of flax fibre as the reinforcing component and high density polyethylene as the matrix. Acrylic acid pre-treatment was applied to flax fibre to improve the bonding between fibre and polyethylene. Extruding was used to mix materials and injection molding technique was carried out to process materials to certain shape biocomposites. The injection temperature and pressure were studied during injection molding to determine appropriate processing parameters for the biocomposites at different fibre content.</div></div>

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 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 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International journal of commercial vehiclesSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207