MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255137775 · doi:10.13031/aea.31.10674

Influence of Weather on the Predicted Moisture Content of Field Chopped EnergySorghum and Switchgrass

2015· article· en· W2255137775 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Popp, Stephen W. Searcy, S. Sokhansanj, J. Smartt, Nathanial Cahill

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Engineering in Agriculture · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater contentEnvironmental sciencePanicum virgatumAgronomyField cornAgricultural engineeringMeteorologyBioenergyEngineeringBiofuelGeographyWaste managementGeotechnical engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. To determine the effects of weather on harvested moisture content (MC) of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and energy sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), tracking of harvest progress on individual fields in the Integrated Biomass Supply and Logistics (IBSAL) model was modified to allow: i) rewetting of swathed material in the drying formulae; and ii) field queuing rules based on equipment availability and weather. Estimated crop yield and initial MC by harvest date, as observed in field trials, along with the modeling of different delays between mowing and harvest allowed estimation of harvested MC, annual tonnage processed and associated processing cost differences by crop and location over 10 years. Extending the hours of annual equipment use had minor implications on cost of production. Energy sorghum proved difficult to dry in the field. Its higher yield, leading to shorter supply distance to the plant, may justify harvesting of energy sorghum early in the season with drier weather. Later harvest for lower-yielding switchgrass offers MC advantages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Engineering in AgricultureSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207