MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128199408 · doi:10.1016/j.jobab.2021.02.006

Experimental investigation on variability in properties of Amazonian wood species Muiracatiara (Astronium lecointei) and Maçaranduba (Manilkara huberi) focusing guitar fingerboards manufacturing

2021· article· en· W3128199408 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roseli Felix da Silva Ribeiro, José Flávio Silveira Feiteira, Jayme Pereira de Gouvêa, Alexandre Furtado Ferreira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioresources and Bioproducts · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFinanciadora de Estudos e ProjetosCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsHorticultureMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In face of scarcity in the supply of non-traditional Brazilian woods properly treated for use in high quality musical instruments, pieces of Amazonian wood species muiracatiara (Astronium lecointei) and maçaranduba (Manilkara huberi) purchased in the common internal Brazilian timber market were examined. These species were pre-selected for use in fingerboards of acoustic and electric guitars due to similar properties with ebony (Diospyros crassiflora). Variabilities of elastic modulus parallel to grain and density were investigated inside wooden pieces. In addition, referred parameters were used in calculation of speed of sound. Statistical tests were performed in order to compare both species and revealed inequality for variances of dynamic elastic modulus (Ed) and speed of sound, but equality for density. Equality of means was also examined via unequal variance t-test. Despite color differences, lower variability of M. huberi led to the indication of this species as likely capable to substitute satisfactorily ebony in fingerboards manufacturing.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.164 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioresources and BioproductsSame topicMaterial Properties and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207