MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2369544262

Study of a New in-bin Porosity Measurement Method

2015· article· en· W2369544262 on OpenAlexaff
F Universit

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Mechanization Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Supply Chain Traceability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinPorosityAirflowPressure measurementAnemometerVolume (thermodynamics)Materials scienceAtmospheric pressureDuct (anatomy)ThermometerTurbulenceEnvironmental scienceMechanicsComposite materialMeteorologyMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research was to develop a new method for in- bin grain porosity measurement without sampling.The new method was based on the gas volume- pressure relationship.Based on the amount of air pumped into the bin to fill the pore space and the corresponding pressure rise,the total pore volume was calculated.An experiment was conducted to validate this method.The experimental set up was made up of a model bin,with an air inlet controlled by a ball valve,an air pump,a duct,a hot wire anemometer,a thermometer,and a pressure gauge.Before the experiment,all connections were checked thoroughly to ensure the system was air- tight.As the air was pumped to the bin,the pressure increased from the atmospheric pressure to a maximum value.This maximum pressure,as well as the time took to reach this pressure were recorded.The flow rate measured by the anemometer was recorded continuously by using a video camera.Seventy- five( 75) tests were performed on wheat and corn.To validate the proposed methods,the porosity of wheat and corn was also measured with the commonly used liquid displacement method.The average measured porosities for the wheat and corn were 34.5% and 41.6%,respectively.And the relative error between the in- bin measurement method and reference value gained by the liquid method( wheat: 33.0%,corn: 40.0%) were 4.55%and 4.00%,respectively.This showed that the proposed in- bin porosity measurement method was adequate and could be used to measure the porosity of grain as a new approach.The advantage of this method is that it could measure the grain porosity during storage without taking samples,and it reflects the true porosity in the bin.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.076 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Mechanization ResearchSame topicFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFrench-language works237,207