MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976525038 · doi:10.1177/0270467607313953

Economic Assessment of Rural District Heating by Bio-Steam Supplied by a Paper Mill in Canada

2008· article· en· W1976525038 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mariya Marinova, Catherine Beaudry, Abdelaziz Taoussi, Martin Trépanier, Jean Paris

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillAgricultural economicsPaper millRural districtBusinessEnvironmental scienceEngineeringWaste managementGeographyEconomicsArchaeologySocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article investigates the feasibility of district heating in a small town adjacent to a Kraft pulp mill in eastern Canada. A detailed heat demand analysis is performed for all buildings using a geographical information system and archived data provided by the municipality. The study shows that the entire space heating requirement of the town can be supplied by steam from the mill, even during exceptional peak demands. A screening test based on load density indicators, however, reveals that a district heating serving the entire town would probably not be economically viable. An economic analysis of partial districts show that a district covering about half of the town can be economically viable with a proper balance between the price of the steam sold by the mill to the district operator and the cost of the energy sold to customers.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Simulation or modelinghigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Simulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207