MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111312801 · doi:10.3390/en6115760

Corn Stover and Wheat Straw Combustion in a 176-kW Boiler Adapted for Round Bales

2013· article· en· W2111312801 on OpenAlexafffund
René Morissette, Philippe Savoie, Joey Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsCorn stoverStrawCombustionHeat of combustionAnimal scienceBoiler (water heating)NOxStoverEnvironmental scienceBarnThermal efficiencyChemistryPulp and paper industryWaste managementBiofuelAgronomyEngineeringCrop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combustion trials were conducted with corn stover (CS) and wheat straw (WS) round bales in a 176-kW boiler (model Farm 2000). Hot water (80 °C) stored in a 30,000-L water tank was transferred to a turkey barn through a plate exchanger. Gross calorific value measured in the laboratory was 17.0 and 18.9 MJ/kg DM (dry matter) for CS and WS, respectively. Twelve bales of CS (1974 kg DM total, moisture content of 13.6%) were burned over a 52-h period and produced 9.2% ash. Average emissions of CO, NOx and SO2 were 2725, 9.8 and 2.1 mg/m3, respectively. Thermal efficiency was 40.8%. For WS, six bales (940 kg DM total, MC of 15%) were burned over a 28-h period and produced 2.6% ash. Average emissions of CO, NOx and SO2 were 2210, 40.4 and 3.7 mg/m3, respectively. Thermal efficiency was 68.0%. A validation combustion trial performed a year later with 90 CS bales confirmed good heating performance and the potential to lower ash content (6.2% average).

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207