Kiln-drying lumber quality of hybrid poplar clones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hybrid poplars are currently used in North America primarily for the production of pulp fibre and in the manufacture of engineered solid wood products. Recently, the deployment of poplars as a short-rotation fibre crop has been of interest to mitigate the increasing amount of plantation-grown short fibre resources (hardwoods) derived from the Southern Hemisphere, as well as in the context of global climate change, both as a means to rapidly sequester carbon and as a feedstock for potential bioenergy production. Knowledge on the utility of hybrid poplars in the value-added secondary wood-processing sector, however, is very limited. To improve this situation, the variation in kiln-drying quality of five hybrid poplar genotypes of similar age, harvested from a common site in British Columbia, Canada, was evaluated for three different kiln-drying schedules. The results clearly demonstrate that the drying schedule has a greater effect on grade recovery and the degree of deformation than the hybrid poplar genotype. Furthermore, it was shown that many of the deformations inherently associated with wood derived from fast-grown trees can be reduced or removed with drying, in particular with an aggressive drying schedule.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".