MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1873432389 · doi:10.1139/er-2013-0073

A review of developments in ballast water management

2014· review· en· W1873432389 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rajoo Balaji, Omar Yaakob, Kho King Koh

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação
KeywordsBallastRatificationSustainabilityPort (circuit theory)EngineeringBusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transportation and translocation of non-native species by ships through ballast water is one of the current issues the shipping industry is trying to address. The Ballast Water Convention is nearing full ratification after which treatment of ballast water will become mandatory for most of the trading merchant vessel categories. Ballast water management systems employing various technologies are commercially available but at high costs. Economics apart, the efficiency of these technologies and realistic ways to ensure compliance with stricter requirements of some Administrations are issues that need to be focussed upon. With the report of the Environmental Protection Agency as an assessment reference, this paper reviews the treatment technologies. Juxtaposing reports of Lloyd’s Register on the status, a concise overview of the technologies has been projected. A sustainable ballast water management based on data and assessments is proposed. The management must be extended to both shore and on-board platforms for practices, treatment, sampling, testing, and recycling. An exemplar system harvesting shipboard waste heat is projected as a route for thermal treatment in combination with technologies showing potential for optimized ballast water management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207