MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7057229881

Integrated Forest Biorefinery Network Design Under Uncertainty

2019· dissertation· en· W7057229881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)HyporeflexiaContext (archaeology)PopulationNucleofectionIntellectualization
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Pulp and Pulp (P&P) industry has been recently confronted by shrinking markets and tighter profit margins. Transforming P&P mills into Integrated Forest Biorefineries (IFBR) is a prominent solution to save the struggling industry and allow diversification towards the promising bioproducts markets. The implementation of such a strategy is a complex process that faces many sources of uncertainty. Therefore, the industry is in need for a planning tool that facilitates the IFBR network design by taking the uncertain market conditions into consideration.
\nFirst, we propose a mixed integer programming model to optimize the investment plan in addition to other tactical decisions over a long term planning horizon. We test the model using a realistic case study for Canadian P&P companies, where we perform a set of sensitivity analysis tests in terms of bioproduct demand and energy prices. Our results showcase the potential of the IFBR to help the P&P industry and highlight the substantial impact of the bioproduct demand on its profitability.
\nSecond, we develop a Multi-stage Stochastic Programming model which explicitly incorporates the demand uncertainty. We also develop a simulation platform to validate the model and compare its performance with alternative decision models. We assess the value of incorporating demand uncertainty in the planning process and we also elaborate on the value of flexibility in terms of adjusting the investment plan in response to changes in market trends. Our results demonstrate the significant value of explicitly incorporating the uncertainty in IFBR network design as well as flexibility in the investment plan.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207