MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204686822 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.7783

Predicting the Relaxation Modulus for the Study of the Delayed Behaviour of Kenaf Fibres in Stress Relaxation

2021· article· en· W3204686822 on OpenAlexaff
S Saïdjo, Richard Ntenga, Etienne Mfoumou, Tibi Béda, A. Béakou

Bibliographic record

VenueFibres and Textiles in Eastern Europe · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Community College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKenafViscoelasticityMaterials scienceRelaxation (psychology)Stress relaxationModulusComposite materialExponential functionStress (linguistics)Deformation (meteorology)Dynamic modulusDynamic mechanical analysisPolymerMathematicsFiberMathematical analysisCreep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant fibres (PFs) are preferred reinforcements of bio-composites. Knowledge of their lifespan requires a study of their viscoelastic behaviour. In this paper, a stress relaxation analysis of kenaf fibres was performed at a constant rate of deformation at room temperature. A method for extracting the relaxation modulus in the deferred zone was proposed. This method was compared, using simulation, with the Zapas-Phillips method and experimental data via three predictive models: the stretched exponential function or KWW, the inverse power law of Nutting and the prony series. The results indicate that the relaxation modulus obtained by the method proposed is in good agreement with the experimental modulus. In addition, the estimated error is of the same order of magnitude as in the case of the Zapas-Phillips method. The parameters estimated from the KWW function (β = 0.4) and prony series model showed an important contribution in the study of the delayed response of kenaf fibres. These results can have a significant impact on the use of kenaf fibres in midterm and long-term loading applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueFibres and Textiles in Eastern EuropeSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207