MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133084371

Fibre bonding and mass decay near a fracture line in paper

2003· dissertation· W7133084371 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFracture (geology)Bond strengthMonte Carlo methodFracture mechanicsBond
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fracture in paper is generally “hairy”, with fibres protruding from the fracture line. Hairy fractures are characterized by a gradual decay of mass near the fracture line. The abruptness of the mass decay depends on the ratio between the number of fibres that break and the number that are pulled from the network. This ratio depends on a number of structural parameters, including fibre length, strength and bond strength. If the first two are known, the bond strength can be deduced by comparing the measured mass decay near the fracture line to the results of a micro mechanical model. In this study, fracture in paper is characterized theoretically using both analytical and Monte Carlo methods. A comparison between the experimental results and theoretical results led to a measurement of effective bond strength in paper. This method incorporates a factor accounting for the inactivation of bonds far from the crack line.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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