MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance of Clay Wood Cook Stove: An Analysis of Cost and Fuel Savings

2014· article· en· W2164981224 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aondoyila Kuhe, H. A. Iortyer, A. Iortsor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable Energy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStoveWaste managementEnvironmental scienceCost analysisPulp and paper industryEngineeringOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The assessment of cooking energy cost and efficiency of improved woodfuel clay cookstoves in Nigeria have been considered in this study. Two improved wood burning clay cookstove models were compared to the 3-stone fire stove using the water boiling test and controlled cooking test. The following parameters: specific fuel consumption (SFC), thermal efficiency, ebulution time and cooking energy cost were considere as key indicators for comparison. The results show that the fire power for the cold starts phases were 7.72KW, 8.59KW and 9.78KW for the stove with grate, modified stove without grate and the 3-stone open fire (TFS) respectively. The thermal efficiencies ranges between 19-35%, 13.8-26.8% and 11.7-22.8% for the cold start, hot start and simmer phases for mud stove with grate (MSWG), mud stove no grate (MSNG) and three stone open fire (TFS) respectively. MSWG, showed the highest savings potential on wood fuel consumption with the lowest total wood cost of N127.80 and sfc of 1.632Kg of fuel/kg of food cooked. While MSNG and TFS, have a total wood fuel cost and SFC of N207.70 , N269.20, and 2.141, 1.632kg of fuel/kg of food cooked respectively.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable EnergySame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207