Water absorption thermodynamics in single wood pellets modelled by multivariate near-infrared spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Samples of wood pellets were adjusted into six water content classes from 0% to 12%. The water content in single pellets varied between 0.1% and 14.2%. Three equations were constructed to estimate the differential heat of sorption (-ΔH) values from (1) fractal-geometry, (2) isosteric, and (3) calorimetric data. The ranges in calculated -ΔH of single pellets were (1) 133–1475, (2) 315–881, and (3) 195–1188 J g-1 water, respectively, across the studied moisture content range. Partial least squares regression was used to model near-infrared (NIR) spectra from single pellets and to predict -ΔH values and water content. The explained variation in test sets for the different models ranged from 97.1% to 99.9%. The shifts in peak absorbance for two water bands indicated that frequency in overtone vibration of O-H stretching and bending decreased, when water content was raised. Simulations of mixes between pellets of differential heat values showed that released heat was up to 0.03% of the gross calorific value of wood pellets. This heat may be a major contributor to initial temperature increases in pellet stacks during storage. The results indicate that on-line NIR based predictions of differential heat in wood pellets is possible to apply in the pellet 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".