Use of Agave durangensis Bagasse Fibers in the Production of Wood-Based Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an increasing interest in using non-wood lignocellulosic materials for the production of wood-based medium density fiberboard (MDF). Agave durangensis Gentry bagasse is a waste product produced in large quantities in the mezcal industry. This study evaluated the incorporation of A. durangensis bagasse fibers (ADBF) to elaborate MDF wood-based panels. Three types of panels with different ratios (wood fibers: bagasse fibers) were investigated. The ratios evaluated were 100:0, 90:10, and 70:30. The density profiles, water absorption, and thickness swell of the panels were determined, as well as the modulus of elasticity (MOE), modulus of rupture (MOR), and internal bond (IB), according to the ASTM D1037-06a standard. The results were compared to the ANSI A208.2-2016 standard. The effect of the addition of ADBF on the properties of the panels was analyzed. Density profiles were comparable among the three types of panels, while water absorption, thickness swelling, MOE, MOR, and IB were similar between panels with ratios of 100:0 and 90:10. Panels with 10% and 30% of ADBF meet the minimum ANSI requirements for quality grade 115. It is feasible to use up to 30% of ADBF in the manufacture of wood-based MDF panels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".