Water sorption hysteresis in wood near 100 °C
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Whether water sorption hysteresis exists above 75 °C and the representation of its relationship with wood softening remains unclear. In this study, sorption hysteresis at three temperature levels, namely, 75, 90 and 99.5 °C, was investigated using accurately controlled conditioning chambers using powder samples from seven wood species. The dry mass loss percentage of the samples and proper equilibrium time was evaluated by pretests to ensure reliable sorption isotherms afterwards. The dry mass loss percentage after the entire sorption isotherm running needs to be kept within 0.5% to avoid complications in determining the equilibrium time. The abrupt increase of equilibrium moisture content at high relative humidity regions and the crossover of adsorption isotherms were not observed. Hysteresis was conspicuous at 75 and 90 °C and was statistically confirmed at 99.5 °C. High sample extractives content or unnecessarily long equilibrium time would cause significant sample dry mass loss, which may suppress the desorption isotherm to an extent that leads to unjustified hysteresis disappearance. The hysteresis behavior observed in this study suggests that wood softening does not necessarily result in hysteresis disappearance, and the explanation of hysteresis progression as a function of wood softening temperature must be evaluated with care in the future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".