Magnesium oxychloride boards: understanding a novel building material
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Magnesium oxide type building boards are a relatively new alternative to traditional sheeting materials such as plywood, gypsum plasterboard and fibre-cement board. They have many advantages; strength, lightweight, ease of use and excellent fire resistance, which has become increasingly important as demanded by industry and required by more stringent legislation. Recently cases of durability issues associated with magnesium oxychloride boards in Denmark have emerged, however the precise nature of the problem was not established. These issues have been related to magnesium oxychloride boards which were exposed to high levels of moisture. In this paper the mechanism of the failures observed in Denmark has been investigated. The difference in quality between various magnesium oxychloride boards available in the market was also studied. It was found that there are significant differences, both physically and chemically, between magnesium oxychloride boards supplied from different manufacturers. Crucially, the performance of each board when exposed to high levels of relative humidity was vastly different. Some of the boards investigated displayed behaviour similar to that observed in Denmark, whilst other boards exhibited substantial resistance to humid environments and had not deteriorated after 60 weeks of exposure.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it