MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892264873 · doi:10.1177/026248931303200401

Foams and Wood Composite Foams Produced by Rotomolding

2013· article· en· W2892264873 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular Polymers · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthFlexural strengthWood flourComposite numberLinear low-density polyethyleneElongationBlowing agentMolding (decorative)High-density polyethyleneWood-plastic compositeCompression moldingTension (geology)PolyethyleneYoung's modulusMoldPolyurethane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a simple method is presented to produce foams and wood composite foams by rotational molding. As a special case, wood flour (maple) / linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) was used to study the effect of chemical blowing agent (CBA) concentration (0-0.6%wt.) and wood content (0-20%wt.). From the samples produced, a complete characterization was performed including density, morphology, and mechanical properties in tension and flexion. The results show that tensile and flexural moduli increased with wood content, while tensile strength and elongation at break decreased. The optimum wood content was found to be around 20%wt. for the composites and around 0.4% wt. CBA for the range of conditions studied.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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