Sodium Iodide as a Contrast Agent for X-ray Micro-CT of a Wood Plastic Composite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The properties of wood plastic composites (WPCs) depend on their microstructure, particularly the level and geometry of wood reinforcement in the composite. We hypothesize that impregnating a WPC with a radiocontrast agent will increase the contrast between wood and plastic, allowing better visualization of its microstructure and numerical analysis of the geometry of its wood reinforcement. A commercial WPC was scanned using X-ray micro-CT, impregnated with aqueous sodium iodide, and then rescanned. CT data from both scans were visualized, and we analyzed the geometry of wood reinforcement and levels of wood, plastic, zinc borate (ZB), and voids in the WPC. ZB occurred mainly as discrete particles between wood flakes, and interfacial voids formed a network of cracks within the WPC. Sodium iodide labeling made it possible to clearly visualize wood and plastic in the WPC and quantify levels of different phases and the geometry of wood particles. However, sodium iodide was not an ideal contrast agent because it swelled wood particles, closed interfacial voids, and partially dissolved ZB particles. We suggest methods of overcoming these limitations and conclude that advances in labeling are necessary to improve our understanding of the relationship between the microstructure of WPCs and their properties.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".