MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1630239585 · doi:10.1109/picmet.2015.7273228

Technology management tools for assessing emerging technologies: The case of grid-scale storage

2015· article· en· W1630239585 on OpenAlexaff
Kourosh Malek, Jatin Nathwani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced battery technologies research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGridEmerging technologiesValuation (finance)Energy storageTechnology managementScale (ratio)Grid computingRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringBusinessKnowledge managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply business and technology management concepts to describe a new framework for valuation and adopting grid-scale emerging storage technologies. The main challenge of adopting emerging storage technologies among utilities is how to match the right energy storage technology to appropriate business-operation strategy for a site-specific grid configuration. With exclusive application in electricity storage market, our analysis approach integrates the technology road map, storage performance matrix, and storage valuation models into business opportunity assessment with additional features that enable fast screening of the emerging storage technologies. The results from this phenomenological study can form the basis of a unique management methodology that assesses alternative technology solutions. It can also provide unbiased information upon which reliable management decisions can be made for adopting new technologies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced battery technologies researchFrench-language works237,207