MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Numerical and Experimental Validation of The Transient Heat And Mass Transfer During Heat Treatment Of Pine Wood

2008· article· en· W1495104072 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modelling and Simulation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Mass transferHeat transferMechanicsMaterials scienceComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractIn the current work, the three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations along with the energy and concentration equations for the fluid coupled with the energy and mass conservation equations for the solid (wood) are solved to study the transient heat and mass transfer during the heat treatment of wood. The model for wood is based on Luikov's approach and solves a set of coupled heat and mass transfer equations. The model equations are solved numerically for the temperature and moisture content histories under different treatment conditions. The simulation of the proposed conjugate problem allows the assessment of the effect of the heat and mass transfer within wood on the transfer in the adjacent gas, providing good insight on the complexity of the transfer mechanisms. To generate data for comparison, measurements of temperature and moisture content of wood samples in a thermogravimetric system were conducted under different operating conditions. It is shown that the predicted and measured values compared very favourably, implying that the proposed numerical algorithm can be used as a useful tool in designing high-temperature wood treatment processes.Key Words: Mathematical modellingLuikov's modelconjugate problemhightemperaturewood treatmentheat and mass transfervalidation Additional informationNotes on contributorsR. YounsiRamdane Younsi is a professor at the applied science department of the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi.D. KocaefeDuygu Kocaefe is a professor and head of the Thermo Transformation Research Group (GRTB), University of Quebec at Chicoutimi.S. PoncsakSandor Poncsak is a professor at the applied science department of the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi.T. JunjunDuygu Kocaefe is a professor and head of the Thermo Transformation Research Group (GRTB), University of Quebec at Chicoutimi.

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 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 score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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