MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385877044 · doi:10.1007/s40725-023-00195-0

Recent Developments and Trends in Sustainable and Functional Wood Coatings

2023· article· en· W4385877044 on OpenAlexafffund
Véronic Landry, Gabrielle Boivin, Diane Schorr, Marie Mottoul, Alex Mary, Liza Abid, Maylis Carrère, Bertrand Laratte

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Forestry Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer composites and self-healing
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsUniversité LavalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFPInnovations
KeywordsCoatingRaw materialIsocyanateBiochemical engineeringNanotechnologyMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringPolyurethaneEngineeringChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decade, a transformation has occurred in the coating industry. While, in the past, the industry was primarily focused on reducing volatile organic compounds (VOC) and formaldehyde emissions, it is now circularity driving this industry. In this paper, we present several advances that have been made, as well as key trends in the wood coatings industry. Replacing petroleum-based chemicals in coating formulations is at the heart of current research. In recent years, various biosourced molecules from animal and plant sources have been the subject of many studies aiming to incorporate them in coatings. Despite all the progress made in the last few years, coating producers are still facing many challenges regarding the availability and quality of biobased raw materials and balancing performance versus cost. While most of the sustainable coating solutions discussed in this review focus on well-known and widely accepted coating chemistries and technologies (water-based and photopolymerizable polyurethanes (PUs), acrylics, and epoxies), we also present new technologies that are expected to gain significant importance in the next few years such as layer-by-layer (LBL), polyelectrolyte complexes, and isocyanate-free PU.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Forestry ReportsSame topicPolymer composites and self-healingFrench-language works237,207