MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594142768 · doi:10.1080/14942119.2017.1297521

A NIR machine for moisture content measurements of forest biomass in frozen and unfrozen conditions

2017· article· en· W2594142768 on OpenAlexaff
Lars Fridh, Sylvain Volpé, L. Eliasson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forest Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsFPInnovations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Water contentHeat of combustionEnvironmental scienceCombustionRepeatabilityMoisturePulp and paper industryMaterials scienceComposite materialMathematicsAgronomyChemistryGeotechnical engineeringStatisticsGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moisture content (M) is an important quality parameter of wood chips, strongly influencing the net calorific value as received. The current standard for determining M, the oven-drying method, is slow and sometimes the sampled lot is combusted before the determination is concluded. This increases the risk of inefficient combustion and reduces the value of M determination. In Scandinavia, winter biomass supply operations are the major source of forest biomass chips to the heating plant and frozen chips are commonly delivered. Comparisons were made between the Prediktor Spektron Biomass, which measures M by near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy, and the oven-drying method. M measurements were carried out for a total of four biomass materials in both frozen and unfrozen condition, where M ranged from 24% to 65% wet basis. On average the machine underestimated M by 0.34%-units for frozen materials and overestimated M by 0.68%-units for unfrozen materials. The results for repeatability of measurements showed that 95% of the measurements were within ±2.24%-units of the mean for the frozen materials and within ±1.72%-units for the unfrozen. This shows that the machine was suited to measure unfrozen and frozen material, and allows the measurement of bulky samples and isn’t constrained by particle size.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Forest EngineeringSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207