MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236717468 · doi:10.24124/2010/bpgub1435

A strategic analysis of factors affecting the establishment of wood charcoal production in central British Columbia

2010· dissertation· en· W4236717468 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cameron Simpson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharcoalProduction (economics)Consumption (sociology)Biomass (ecology)Work (physics)BusinessWood productionAgricultural economicsForestryGeographyEngineeringEconomicsForest managementEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mountain pine beetle epidemic has resulted in considerable volume of wood fibre becoming available in the province of British Columbia. The epidemic, combined with the provincial downturn in the forest industry, has encouraged steps to diversify the forestry-based economy of the central interior of British Columbia. Through a review of available literature supplemented with information obtained through the author's employment, global charcoal production and consumption was explored to determine the opportunities and challenges that exist for the production of charcoal from various wood fibre sources. Challenges and opportunities include the availability of biomass feedstocks, domestic market demand, production technology, and funding. It is recommended to investigate further the use of portable pyrolysis technology for access to fibre in remote locations. However, further work is required to examine the overall economics of accessing the fibre and production operations. --P. ii.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207