MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005799560 · doi:10.1515/npprj-2019-0083

On the development of the refiner mechanical pulping process – a review

2020· review· en· W3005799560 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLignin and Wood Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMittuniversitetetUniversity of British ColumbiaStiftelsen för Kunskaps- och Kompetensutveckling
KeywordsProcess (computing)Focus (optics)Process developmentComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringEngineeringProcess engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper is a review of the development of the mechanical pulping process with focus on refiner-based processes. The intention is to provide an overview of the trends and the major advances in the development of the mechanical pulping (MP) process. The focus is on the development of the entire MP process, rather than the refiner as such. However, when discussing the MP process development, it is inevitable to consider the development of the refiner unit operation briefly. Processes for printing papers based on softwood is mainly discussed, but board processes are discussed briefly as well.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.274 · 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