Joule heating of logs for phytosanitary purposes and timber processing pre-treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Joule heating has recently been investigated as a potential alternative to chemical fumigation for phytosanitary treatment of Pinus radiata logs exported from New Zealand. The research was driven by concern regarding the effects of methyl bromide release to atmosphere, following fumigation, as highlighted by the Montreal Protocol. The work has involved creating 1 dimensional and 3 dimensional computer models of the Joule heating process in P. radiata, building a laboratory-scale log test rig with suitable instrumentation and control systems, heating approximately 60 P. radiata logs and using the measured data to refine and validate the models. While engaged in this work it became clear that the process could also potentially be applied to heat veneer peeler logs. This paper describes the application of the 1 dimensional model and laboratory-scale test rig to a typical P. radiata export log and to a Eucalyptus nitens log prepared for veneer peeling. The results demonstrate that, despite the heterogeneities of the timber, the technique is capable of achieving the required temperature profiles for both applications and that the model is a sufficiently good representation of the process to provide a viable control method.
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".