Delayed elastic strain and set-recovery evaluation in high-pressure densified hybrid poplar wood – New assessment considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The deformation behavior of high-pressure (HP)-treated hybrid poplar wood, the subsequent swelling, and the equilibrium moisture content properties of HP-densified wood were evaluated using a modified delayed strain/set-recovery method of cyclic humidification-dehumidification at different relative humidity (RH) conditions. The HP treatment resulted in significant compression (densification) of the wood under different treatment conditions. For treated wood samples, the value of delayed elastic strain was relatively small when stored at 20 °C and 65% RH, which indicated that HP-densified wood possessed dimensional stability. The HP-compressed poplar yielded lower equilibrium moisture content than the control at low RH, while major increases were observed at high RH above 76%. Marginal of thickness swelling was observed under the cyclic humidification-dehumidification method in the low RH range while significant swelling occurred at high RH. Conventional methods would only show results that were appropriate for storage at high RH environments. The RH threshold for set-recovery of HP-compressed wood was between 33% and 54% for optimal use, and the extent of set-recovery increased rapidly when RH was between 85% and 95%. Such differences could not be recognized with the conventional methods. In addition, the prolonged holding time significantly decreased the RH threshold value (P < 0.05).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".