Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultraviolet light emitting diodes (UV-LEDs) have attracted great interest in recent years. They can be used to polymerize coatings, such as those used for prefinished wood flooring. In this project, two lamps were compared for their suitability to be used on a wood flooring finishing line: a UV-microwave and a UV-LED lamp. Low heat emission was found for the UV-LED lamp compared to the UV-microwave one. This study also reveals that the 4 W/cm2 UV-LED lamp used is not powerful enough to cure UV high solids acrylate coatings while satisfactory results can be obtained for UV water-based formulations. In fact, conversion percentages were found to be low for the high solids coatings, leaving the coatings tacky. Higher conversion percentages were obtained for the UV water-based formulations. As a result, mass loss, hardness, and scratch resistance found for the samples cured by UV-LED were closed to the ones found for the samples cured using the UV microwave lamp.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it