Utilisation en papeterie du bois de trois conifères américains cultivés dans l'est de la France (épicéa de Sitka, sapin de Vancouver, sapin de Douglas). - I. Considérations forestières - II. Essais sur la valeur papetière effectués à l'école française de papeterie (Université de Grenoble)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
USE IN PAPER MAKING OF THE WOODOF THREE AMERICAN CONIFEROUSCULTIVATED IN THE EAST OF THE FRANCE(Sitka spruce, Vancouver fir, Douglas fir) - SUMMARY - The question arises in France to produce in sufficient quantitywood to the fabrication of wood pulp. In this aim, peoplelook at the creation of artificial crops with quick growing coniferousspecies. Amongst them there are three species indigenousto the North America wich call to a special attention : Sitkaspruce (Picea sitchensis), Vancouver fir (Abies grandis) andDouglas fir (Pseudo tsuga Douglasii).Tests have been undertook by the « École des Eaux et Forêts» since thirthy five years in the domesnial forest of Amance,near Nancy on several foreign species and specially on thesequoted above. Sample plots of twenty five " ares " have beenestablished in a deep clayey soil, under the climate of continentaltype with scharp winter and rather dry and warmsummer which characterizes the East of the France. Theobtained results have been favourable. The three speciesproved a good success, the growth was quick and the yeld considerable.To estimate the behalf of the wood of these species, cultivatedand at a not very old age cutted in that way, according to thefabrication of paper, tests have been carried out at the " ÉcoleFrançaise de Papeterie " depending on the Université deGrenoble " with samples coming from trees cut in the plantationof the Amance Forest. Tests were carried out according tothe fabrication of soda and sulphite pulp.The conclusion of the tests is the wood of american speciescultivated in the Amance Forest and used between 20 and30 years old have been revealed suitable to make paper as wellthe wood of these species grown in America.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".