MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014354561 · doi:10.4236/jpee.2020.83005

Biomass Combined Heat and Power Generation for Anticosti Island: A Case Study

2020· article· en· W3014354561 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Power and Energy Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoiler (water heating)Combined cycleSteam turbineHeat recovery steam generatorElectricity generationSteam-electric power stationElectricityFeedwater heaterWaste managementPower stationEnvironmental scienceEngineeringProcess engineeringGas turbinesNuclear engineeringMechanical engineeringPower (physics)Electrical engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combined heat and power (CHP) plants (co-generation plants) using biomass as fuel, can be an interesting alternative to the predominant electrical heating in Canada. The biomass-fueled boiler provides heat for the steam cycle which in turn generates electricity from the generator connected to the steam turbine. In addition, heat from the process is supplied to a district heating system. The heat can be extracted from the system in a number of ways, by using a back-pressure steam turbine, an extraction steam turbine or by extracting heat directly from the boiler. The objective of the paper is the design, modeling and simulation of such CHP plant. The plant should be sized for providing electric-ity and heat for the Anticosti Island community in Quebec.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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