MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894529873 · doi:10.1115/1.4041567

Linear Sensor Arrangement for Softwood Grain Angle Measurements by Directional Reflection

2018· article· en· W2894529873 on OpenAlexafffund
Qi Pan, G. S. Schajer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nondestructive Evaluation Diagnostics and Prognostics of Engineering Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Roughness and Optical Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerpendicularOpticsTotal internal reflectionMaterials scienceSoftwoodScannerSurface (topology)Plane (geometry)Reflection (computer programming)GeometryPhysicsMathematicsComposite materialComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A linear sensor arrangement is presented as a means of measuring the three-dimensional grain angle of wood. The measurement principle is based on an optical characteristic of a wood surface where the microscopic cell structure causes preferential reflection of light perpendicular to the wood grain. This response is notable among the several other techniques for measuring wood grain angle in that it enables identification of diving (out-of-plane) angle in addition to the surface (within-plane) angle. The basic measurement principle has been previously investigated using a circular array of light sensors to measure the spatial distribution of the light reflected from a wood surface. That procedure works reasonably well for surface points near the center of the circle and for modest dive angles. The linear sensor arrangement investigated here is designed to extend measurement functionality so as to be able to measure grain angle at any point along a central line and over a greater range of dive angle. A prototype scanner system is presented together with example experimental results for clear wood samples and for a face knot sample.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nondestructive Evaluation Diagnostics and Prognostics of Engineering SystemsSame topicSurface Roughness and Optical MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207