MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911654097 · doi:10.1515/npprj-2018-0040

Theoretical analysis of LC-refining – pressure screening systems in TMP

2019· article· en· W2911654097 on OpenAlexafffund
Jorge Enrique Rubiano Berna, Christer Sandberg, Mark Martinez, James A. Olson

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFPInnovationsBC Hydro
KeywordsRefining (metallurgy)Process engineeringPower (physics)Computer scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringThermodynamicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LC refining of mechanical pulps has proven to save energy in the production of TMP pulps. However, the specific role of LC refining as part of a TMP system has not been thoroughly studied since it is difficult to conceive any particular system at industrial-scales and impractical at pilot-scales. In this study, pressure screening and LC refining models that describe fibre length distributions, together with correlations to predict refining power were used to model three basic refining systems. From the simulation results, the impact of important variables such as reject ratio, refiner gap and refining net-power was studied. Performance curves of length-weighed average fibre length were generated from simulation results and were used to assess each system behaviour and also to make comparisons between systems. Data from an industrial scale TMP mill sub-system was gathered and compared to simulation results showing relative errors between 0-18 % on the predicted variables.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNordic Pulp & Paper Research JournalSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207