MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7006823394

Wood sorption, capillary condensation and their implications for building envelopes of wood construction

2011· article· en· W7006823394 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsEquilibrium moisture contentSoftwoodRelative humidityMoistureWater contentSorptionSaturation (graph theory)Capillary condensationCapillary action
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the existing knowledge and a number of controversial issues concerning the relationship between wood and moisture, around basic concepts such as adsorption/desorption, capillary condensation, and the fiber saturation point. It starts with characteristics of wood micro-structure, with a focus on the pores in cell walls, followed by sorption in wood cell walls, the potential for vapour condensation at high relative humidity (RH) conditions, the measurement of wood equilibrium moisture content (EMC) at different RH levels and the concept of fiber saturation point. The discussion is then focused on the potential impact of a number of wood structure and use-related factors on the measurement of EMC under near-saturated RH conditions, particularly about the use of the pressure plate method for predicting the moisture content of low-permeance softwood species. Recommendations were provided on further studies on EMC measurement and EMC testing methods. The intent of the paper is to improve the understanding of wood properties and behaviour in building applications, and emphasise the importance of moisture management in building envelopes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207