Fracture of Solid Wood: A Review of Structure and Properties at Different Length Scales
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
This paper presents a review of the fracture literature of solid wood.The review is not exhaustive and is focused on the structure and properties of wood at different length scales.Fracture of wood has been examined in all pure modes as well as mixed-Mode I and II and all directions-radial, tangential, and longitudinal.The literature has been studied at a variety of levels from molecular through cellular and growth ring to macroscopic.The major conclusions are that fracture toughness perpendicular to the grain is greater than that parallel to the grain and Mode II is greater than Mode I, within a given species.Also, fracture toughness increases with increasing density and strain rate.Defects typically reduce the strength and fracture toughness, with edge defects having a greater effect.Finally, the fracture toughness of solid wood reaches a maximum between 6 to 8% moisture content.The paper discusses how these macroscopic observations are related to the chemical composition and micro/meso-structure of wood.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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