MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924258054 · doi:10.1515/hf-2018-0156

Evaluation of bond strength of cross-laminated LSL specimens under short-span bending

2019· article· en· W2924258054 on OpenAlexaff
Meng Gong, Ling Li, Ying Hei Chui

Bibliographic record

VenueHolzforschung · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyvinyl acetateAdhesiveBendingMaterials scienceComposite materialSpan (engineering)Bond strengthStructural engineeringPolyurethaneLayer (electronics)EngineeringPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mass timber panels (MTPs) have a great potential in the construction of mid- and high-rise buildings. Evaluation of the face-bond strength of MTPs is of great practical interest for this kind of products. This study aimed at developing an appropriate test procedure for evaluating the adhesive bond strength of cross-laminated laminated strand lumber (CL-LSL). Three-point short-span bending tests were conducted on two-layer asymmetric CL-LSL specimens (2LasymCL-LSL), which were adhesively bonded by two-component resins of the type polyurethane (PUR) or polyvinyl acetate (PVAc). For comparison, block shear specimens were tested as well. It was found that the 2LasymCL-LSL assembly was better suitable under the short-span bending for differentiating between good and poor bond quality of MTPs.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHolzforschungSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207