MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W34185038 · doi:10.4997/jrcpe.2021.241

Numerical and experimental validation of heat and mass transfer during heat treatment of wood

2007· article· en· W34185038 on OpenAlexaff
R. Younsi, Duygu Kocaefe, Sándor Poncsák, T. Junjun

Bibliographic record

Venueinternational conference on Modelling and simulation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass transferHeat transferWork (physics)Transient (computer programming)MechanicsThermodynamicsMoistureMaterials scienceComputer sciencePhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current work, the three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations along with the energy and concentration equations for the fluid coupled with the energy and mass conservation equations for the solid (wood) are solved to study the transient heat and mass transfer during the heat treatment of wood. The model for wood is based on Luikov's approach and solves a set of coupled heat and mass transfer equations. The model equations are solved numerically for the temperature and moisture content histories under different treatment conditions. The simulation of the proposed conjugate problem allows the assessment of the effect of the heat and mass transfer within wood on the transfer in the adjacent gas, providing good insight on the complexity of the transfer mechanisms. In order to generate data for comparison, measurements of temperature and moisture content of wood samples in a thermogravimetric system were conducted under different operating conditions. It is shown that the predicted and measured values compared very favorably, implying that the proposed numerical algorithm can be used as a useful tool in designing high-temperature wood treatment processes.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueinternational conference on Modelling and simulationSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207