MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408928865 · doi:10.3390/molecules30071506

Transparent Wood Fabrication and Applications: A Review

2025· review· en· W4408928865 on OpenAlexaff
Lê Văn Hải, Tin Diep Trung Le, Seung Hyeon Park, Tae Hyun Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersCollege of Medicine, Hanyang UniversityKorea Evaluation Institute of Industrial TechnologyMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaHanyang University
KeywordsMaterials scienceFabricationUltimate tensile strengthTransmittanceComposite materialMechanical strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood cellulose is an abundant bio-based resource with diverse applications in construction, cosmetics, packaging, and the pulp and paper industries. Transparent wood (TW) is a novel, high-quality wood material with several advantages over traditional transparent materials (e.g., glass and plastic). These benefits include renewability, UV shielding, lightweight properties, low thermal expansion, reduced glare, and improved mechanical strength. TW has significant potential for various applications, including transparent roofs, windows, home lighting structures, electronic devices, home decoration, solar cells, packaging, smart packaging materials, and other high-value-added products. The mechanical properties of TW, such as tensile strength and optical transmittance, are typically up to 500 MPa (Young's modulus of 50 GPa) and 10-90%, respectively. Fabrication methods, wood types, and processing conditions significantly influence the mechanical and optical properties of TW. In addition, recent research has highlighted the feasibility of TW and large-scale production, making it an emerging research topic for future exploration. This review attempted to provide recent and updated manufacturing methods of TW as well as current and future applications. In particular, the effects of structural modification through various chemical pretreatment methods and impregnation methods using various polymers on the properties of TW biocomposites were also reviewed.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207