MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7036540758

Characterization and modeling of unsaturated water liquid transport in softwoods

2005· dissertation· en· W7036540758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoistureSoftwoodRelative humidityWater vaporCapillary actionWater transportWater contentHumiditySorptionAbsorption of water
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moisture sources in the building envelope are, in order of magnitude: rain penetration, moisture brought through air movement and moisture diffusion. As rain water impinges onto the wall and runs off the surface, water may seep into cracks and accumulate within the wood frame structure. Water can move by capillary action into wood-based components and the water vapor can also be diffusing through the structure. In the hygroscopic range, the theory has evolved considerably, and by the use of sorption curves, it is possible to explain the absorption of water in the vapor phase for a range of relative humidity (from 0 to 95% RH). However, liquid mass diffusivities of water for many Canadian wood species have not yet been investigated. The main objectives of this study are to quantify averaged values of diffusivities for a specific type of wood (jack pine), and to develop a transient modeling approach for liquid-phase water transport in wood considering the orthotropic effect of the wood structure and compare it to experimental results.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)→Same topicBiblical Studies and Interpretation→French-language works237,207→