Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of roll splitting wood originated in 1967 when the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) forest products specialists developed a wood fibrator. The objective of that work was to produce raw materials for reconstituted board products. More recently, TVA focused on roll splitting as a field process to accelerate drying of small trees (3-15 cm diameter), much like the process used for conditioning hay. Recently, TVA’s interest in roll splitting was stimulated by its development by the Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada (FERIC). The interest in this process as a harvesting process stems from several hypothetical advantages and the opportunity to channel funds used for vegetation control to harvest biomass. Cooperative efforts among TVA; the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (FS); and FERIC--along with independent work by other organizations--have confirmed some of the hypotheses. The intent of this paper is to outline the work accomplished to date, not only on roll splitting, but also other components of the harvesting system in which it would play a key role. Vegetation control consumes tens of millions of dollars annually in the United States. The authors ’ position is that multiple
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".