Pyrolysis of ground pine chip and ground pellet particles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In addition to particle size, biomass density influences heat and mass transfer rates during the thermal treatment processes. In this research, thermal behaviour of ground pine chip particles and ground pine pellet particles in the range of 0.25–5 mm was investigated. A single particle from ground pellets was almost 3 to 4 times denser than a single particle from ground chips at a similar size and volume of particle. Temperature was ramped up from room temperature (∼25 °C) to 600 °C with heating rates of 10, 20, 30, and 50 °C/min. Pellet particles took 25–88 % longer time to dry than the chip particles. Microscopic examination of 3 mm and larger chip particles showed cracks during drying. No cracks were observed for pellet particles. The mass loss due to treatment at temperatures higher than 200 °C was about 80 % both for chip and pellet particles. It took 4 min for chip and pellet particles to lose roughly 63 % of their dry mass at a heating rate of 50 °C/min. The SEM structural analysis showed enlarged pores and cracks in cell walls of the pyrolyzed wood chips. These pores were not observed in pyrolyzed pellet particles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".