Crushing Strength Sampling With Minimal Damage to Taiwania ( Taiwania Cryptomerioides ) Using a Fractometer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Fractometer is a device that stresses radial increment cores in the direction of the fiber to measure crushing strength, which can provide a direct wood quality indicator for structural lumber. This study analyzes the pattern of the radial variation in Taiwania (Taiwania cryptomerioides Hay.) trunk wood crushing strength to explore its effect on the precision and efficiency of the sampling procedure in the outer increment core zone as an alternate nondestructive sampling method. A pith-to-bark 0.5-cm caliber core was extracted at breast height (1.3 m above the ground) from each tree and was separated into individual section groups. Then individual crushing strengths were determined using the Fractometer.In this study, the variation in crushing strength in the transverse direction increased from the pith outward to the bark side. An analysis of variance and correlation analysis were used to evaluate the data. The magnitude of the radial variation in crushing strength was smaller than the tree-to-tree variation. Including samples of at least 7.2 cm, 5.4 cm, and 2.4 cm near the bark side was found to be acceptable for the assessment of wood crushing strength for trees of Type A (DBH > 27 cm), Type B (DBH = 23~27 cm), and Type C (DBH > 23 cm), 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".