MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fuel Properties of Sugar Maple and Yellow Birch Wood in Relation with Tree Vigor

2016· article· en· W2254629027 on OpenAlexaffabout
Quy Nam Nguyen, Alain Cloutier, Alexis Achim, Tatjana Stevanović

Bibliographic record

VenueBioResources · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMapleSugarYellow birchRelation (database)Tree (set theory)Pulp and paper industryMaterials scienceForestryAceraceaeBotanyComposite materialEnvironmental scienceHorticultureMathematicsChemistryBiologyEngineeringGeographyFood scienceComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fuel properties of wood obtained from sugar maple (SM) and yellow birch (YB) of temperate hardwood stands located in the Province of Qubec, Canada were studied to see how tree vigor affects the chemical composition and calorific value of the wood. This study focused on the physical and chemical properties of wood with the aim of using the material for the production of solid biofuels. Specific items measured included the wood's calorific values, and the levels of extractives, ash, and lignin. Changes in chemical composition were found among tree vigor classes. The low vigor trees had higher extractives, ash, and lignin contents than the vigorous trees. Total extractives ranged between 4.88 and 7.32% in SM, and between 3.35 and 5.12% in YB. Klason lignin ranged between 21.46 and 23.53% in SM, and between 18.60 and 21.51% in YB. Ash content ranged between 0.38 and 0.97% in SM, and between 0.26 and 0.47% in YB. The combined effects of higher lignin content that could contribute to a better self-bonding of particles and of higher extractives content that could facilitate the pelletization process makes the low vigor trees more suitable for conversion into solid biofuels. The higher amounts of extractives and lignin present in the low vigor sugar maple and yellow birch trees could also have a positive role in maintaining the high calorific values of this wood despite higher ash content.

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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioResourcesSame topicLignin and Wood ChemistryFrench-language works237,207