MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313057989 · doi:10.13031/aea.15133

3D Pore Structure Characterization of Stored Grain Bed

2022· article· en· W4313057989 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Chioma Nwaizu, Qiang Zhang, Christiana Iluno

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Engineering in Agriculture · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortuosityCompactionPorosityMaterials scienceAirflowVolume (thermodynamics)Composite materialMineralogyGeologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Highlights An image analysis for reconstruction of 3D pore structure within bulk grain was presented. Mathematical models for porosity and tortuosity were developed from the 3D reconstructed images. The mathematical models can be incorporated in computational model of flow through bulk grains. Abstract. An image analysis technique for reconstruction of the complex 3D pore structure within bulk grain from 2D section images was presented. The technique relies on aligning successive 2D images of cut-sections obtained from colored-wax solidified soybean grain beds, which were then subjected to image processing using ImageJ software developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH, Bethesda, Md.) for the reconstruction and visualization of different airflow paths within the bulk grain. Porosity and tortuosity values were quantified from the 3D image volume and 3D reconstructed inter-connected airflow paths to develop empirical mathematical models for predicting porosity and tortuosity as a function of compaction due to the pressure exerted by the grain depth. Results indicated that the rate of decrease in porosity was higher at the lower compaction grain depth and then gradually approached a minimum value as the compaction grain depth increased. At the top of the compacted grain, the porosity of the tested soybean bed was determined to be 0.42 and reduced to 0.34 at a compaction pressure of 14.2 kPa (equivalent to a compaction grain depth of 25 m). Tortuosity increased with the compaction pressure from 1.15 to 1.58 at a compaction pressure of 14.2 kPa (equivalent to 25 m of grain depth), or by 37.4%. Keywords: Grain bed, Image analysis, Pore structure, Porosity, Tortuosity.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Engineering in AgricultureSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207