Pelleting of Fractionated Alfalfa Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A pilot scale pellet mill was used to produce pellets using ground alfalfa leaf and stemfractions. The moisture content of the dehydrated alfalfa chops was 9.6% (wet basis). The leaf andstem fractions were segregated into two lots and ground in a hammer mill using two screen sizes of3.2 mm (1/8 in.) and 1.98 mm (5/64 in.). The leaf and stem fractions from each sample lot of samegrind sizes were combined to get five different samples with leaf content ranging from 0% to 100%with an increment of 25%. The moisture content and temperature of the samples were raised to 10-11% (w.b.) and 76oC, respectively, in a double chamber steam conditioner prior to pelletingoperation. Material temperature was further raised to 95oC in the pellet mill due to the frictionbetween its roller-die assembly. During this whole process the average particle size of sample lots,temperature and moisture content of samples after various pelleting stages were recorded.Durability of dehydrated alfalfa fluctuated between high and medium range (except for 100% stems,which was low). Dehydrated alfalfa with 0% leaves produced pellets with better color.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".