Chemical surface densification of sugar maple through Michael addition reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wood densification is a technique to enhance wood density and hardness, presenting a promising solution to expand wood use across various applications. However, current densification methods have cost and environmental impact limitations. This project introduces a potential environmentally friendly approach involving surface chemical densification through in-situ polymerization, using carbon Michael addition reaction between biobased acrylate and malonate monomers. This reaction, conducted in mild conditions with low energy and solvent consumption, aims to enhance wood densification while minimizing environmental impact. Various malonate-acrylate systems were formulated, and were optimized based on their viscosity, conversion rate, glass transition temperature, crosslinking density, and hardness. Then, sugar maple wood samples were densified with the most effective formulations. Monomers with lower viscosity demonstrated higher level of chemical retention. Density profile and penetration depth were also higher for the samples impregnated with lower viscosity formulations, as confirmed by X-Rray densitometer and scanning electron microscopy. Confocal Raman spectroscopy confirmed that formulations successfully filled lumens and vessels without reacting with the cell wall components. The brinell hardness was used to determine the hardness of natural and densified woods. One-way ANOVA data analysis showed a significant increase in hardness of densified samples compared to untreated wood; however, based on TUKEY Anova analysis, no noticeable difference was reported between impregnated samples with different formulations. Overall, results showed the potential effectiveness of the Michael addition reaction in wood impregnation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".