MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2297951640 · doi:10.5558/tfc2013-113

Nonlinear multivariate modeling of strand mechanical properties with near-infrared spectroscopy

2013· article· en· W2297951640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brian K. Via, Wei Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrared spectroscopySpectroscopyInfraredBendingMaterials scienceComposite numberNear-infrared spectroscopyComposite materialMultivariate statisticsWood-plastic compositeOpticsChemistryPhysicsMathematicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research was to determine if nonlinear calibrations of near-infrared spectra could improve the prediction of strand mechanical properties. Strands similar in dimension to strands utilized in an oriented strand board composite process were prepared and tested for mechanical properties in three-point bending and then calibrated to near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy. It was found that an additional 7% to 16% of the variation in mechanical properties could be accounted for when second- and third-order terms were applied. Interpretation of models identified the magnitude of importance that various wood polymers play on mechanical properties and this interpretation was validated through wet chemistry. This work is significant because it demonstrates the potential of using near-infrared spectroscopy to monitor shifts in strand mechanical properties prior to wood composite manufacture and it helps to provide the fundamental relationship between near-infrared models, wood chemistry, and the prediction of mechanical properties.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207