MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THz-based Density Prediction in Timber Wood using Stacked Ensemble Regression Strategy

2025· article· W7140135784 on OpenAlexaff
Aditi Sagesh, Keerthana V, A. Mercy Latha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldChemistry
TopicWood and Agarwood Research
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegression analysisRegressionLinear regressionArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Density is a crucial parameter that greatly influences the mechanical properties, structural grading, and thereby, overall utilization of timber wood across diverse industrial domains. Hence, the accurate prediction of wood density is very important, which in turn enables the evaluation of defects and the estimation of moisture content in timber wood species. Although traditional density estimation techniques, such as gravimetry, X-ray densitometry, and manual inspection, are effective to some extent, they are often limited by their destructive nature, high cost, subjectivity, sensitivity, or safety concerns. To circumvent the limitations of existing techniques, terahertz (THz) technology has been explored here as a nondestructive, non-ionizing alternative for assessing the quality of timber wood. THz radiation can capture the difference in material properties arising from variations in internal structure, which in turn are correlated with wood density. In this work, a publicly available THz open dataset has been utilized, which contains the THz temporal signals of 78 samples from six diverse wood species. Here, a uniquely tailored combination of pre-processing steps, feature extraction techniques, and a stacked regression ensemble has been adopted to predict the wood density precisely. The stacked ensemble regressor sequentially integrates different ensemble learners strategically, with random forest, XGBoost, CatBoost, and the ridge regressor. This proposed approach yields a very high R2score of 0.9996, highlighting the advantages of integrating THz technology with machine learning techniques for precise, non-destructive estimation of wood density in the timber industry.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWood and Agarwood ResearchFrench-language works237,207