Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to prepare a polymer reinforced wood-based composite with excellent properties,a fast-growing wood,Populus ussuriensis Kom,and glycidyl methacrylate(GMA) as a difunctional monomer and methyl methacrylate(MMA) as an acrylate monomer were selected,and the monomers were impregnated into the porous structure of wood and further initiated by a catalyst-thermal treatment for their in situ polymerization.The composite's structure was characterized by SEM,FTIR and XRD,and its corresponding properties were also tested.The results show that the contact between polymers and wood cell walls is tight,and the interfacial interaction is strengthened after adding GMA.GMA fully reacts with the hydroxyl group on wood cell walls by its epoxy group,and reacts with MMA in a free radical copolymerization form by its double bond.The copolymer,P(GMA-co-MMA) is finally grafted onto wood cell walls in an amorphous form.The testing results of its properties show that the modulus of rupture(MOR),the dimensional stability,the decay resistance and the thermal stability of P(GMA-co-MMA)/wood are increased by 90.53%,54.05%,92.85% and 31℃ compared with those of untreated wood,respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".