MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398250400 · doi:10.1186/s10086-024-02135-3

Oblique radiographic measurement of knot position and orientation in logs

2024· article· en· W4398250400 on OpenAlexafffund
G. S. Schajer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wood Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceFPInnovations
KeywordsKnot (papermaking)Orientation (vector space)Position (finance)RadiographyOblique caseMaterials scienceGeometryGeologyPhysicsNuclear physicsMathematicsComposite materialBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A novel X-ray scanner system to identify the positions of knots in logs is described. The scanner has a simple, low-cost design that is suitable for use in medium and smaller sawmills. It makes X-ray measurements in an oblique direction as the log moves longitudinally past the X-ray source and line-detector. This unconventional oblique measurement direction creates a more side-on view that better reveals the spatial arrangement of the knots within the log. This view, when combined with the knowledge that all knots start from along the pith and radiate outwards gives sufficient information to identify knot orientations in space. Experimental oblique X-ray measurements on a sample log are described, followed by the processing and analysis of the measured radiographs, and a comparison of the results with independent measurements of knot locations. With the knot identification algorithms developed, knot axial position could be identified within 11 mm, and knot circumferential orientation with a root mean square (rms) error of 7.9°–11.6° when using a single view X-ray scanner, or 5.6°–7.7° when using a dual view scanner.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wood ScienceSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207