MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285937122 · doi:10.1177/0731684415617537

Analysis of mesoscopic pore size in 3D-interlock fabrics and validation of a predictive permeability model

2015· article· en· W2285937122 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Vernet, F. Trochu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNational Research Council CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMaterials scienceTortuosityComposite materialPermeability (electromagnetism)Mesoscopic physicsInterlockComposite numberTransverse planePorosityFiberStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports an experimental investigation aiming to validate a predictive model of in-plane and transverse permeability for three-dimensional interlock fabrics as a function of fabric architecture. Composite specimens were fabricated and cut to conduct microscopic observations of pore dimensions for five three-dimensional interlock fabrics compressed to a fiber volume content of 58%. The pore cross-section height and width, the number of pores and the pore tortuosity were measured to evaluate an average pore size and distribution along the warp and weft directions for each fabric considered. The changes of these geometrical parameters are analyzed as a function of the fabric structure. A previously developed permeability analytical model is applied using the geometrical characteristics derived from the experimental observations. This allows comparing the experimental permeability to the theoretical predictions of the model and to the values calculated by the same model from the experimentally observed pore dimensions at the considered fiber volume content of 58%. The good agreement obtained in all cases between the measured and calculated values of permeability confirms the validity of the proposed analytical model.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reinforced Plastics and CompositesSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207