MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1524611157 · doi:10.1080/01998590709509517

Designing a Program to Reduce GHG Emissions and Generate Renewable Energy from Landfill Sites

2007· article· en· W1524611157 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethaneLandfill gasRenewable energyGreenhouse gasWaste managementCombustionEnvironmental scienceBiogasEnvironmental engineeringMethane emissionsElectricityEngineeringMunicipal solid wasteChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Emission reductions are achieved in the landfill sector through the capture and combustion of landfill gas (LFG). When organic matter in landfills decomposes in anaerobic conditions, methane is produced. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), methane (CH4) is 21 times more harmful to the environment than CO2. To prevent this methane from escaping to the atmosphere, wells are drilled and a collection piping network is installed in the landfill. The LFG, which contains methane, is sucked into the network and carried to a combustion unit. The act of combustion destroys the methane and breaks it down into CO2, a much less potent GHG. The energy produced in the combustion process could also be used to make green electricity or steam for various purposes. In this article, the PERRL experience is used to describe how we implemented the program, what we have learned, and how you could use it to design similar programs.

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.

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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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