MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1788770676

Inadequacy of wind turbine noise regulations and their application

2009· article· en· W1788770676 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
J. P. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineNoise (video)Wind powerMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceInflowShut downEngineeringMeteorologyComputer scienceAerospace engineeringElectrical engineeringGeographyNuclear engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This talk will have an Ontario slant because that is where things are happening just now. Last month (September 2009), the regulations for future wind-energy development under the Ontario Green Energy Act were released. This Act removes municipalities from the approval process and puts the final decision on projects with the Ontario government. The regulations for noise at a receptor issued by the

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207