Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermogravimetric analysis showed that the derivative thermogravimetry (DTG) curve had difference in shape for various wood samples. As single-component kinetic model cannot be used to explain this phenomenon, a new multicomponent kinetic model was proposed. The DTG curve of Pterocarpus indicus had an obvious “shoulder peak” at the position before thermo-degradation rate reached the maximum, which was caused by its higher proportion of hemi-cellulose in biomass composition. However, the DTG curves of two other wood samples, Cunninghamia lanceolata and Fraximus mandshurica which contained lower hemi-cellulose component, appeared smoother. On the assumption that the three main components in biomass underwent individual thermo-degradation, a multi-component kinetic model was developed. The parameters in the model were obtained by thermogravimetric analysis of Pterocarpus indicus. The simulated thermo-degradation of the two other samples, Cunninghamia lanceolata and Fraximus mandshurica, accorded well with the experimental result.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".