Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper seeks to illustrate designation of a real‐time oil spill monitoring and management system using computer system, GIS models, internet and a variety of other technologies. Design/methodology/approach Appropriate models in GIS, together with monitoring technologies and internet‐based communication infrastructure, facilitate oil spill early warning, situational analysis, risk analysis and damage analysis in addition to management and disaster response in real‐time. The system architect includes command and control module, designed for managing and coordinating oil spill accidents response. The structure also includes an accident data dissemination scheme, through an internet portal which distributes disaster thematic products and facilitates communication between oil spill disaster players and the administration office. Findings The functionality of such a system through its components including database, central repository, disaster models, command and control and communication schemes covers all the stages of spill management before, during, and after an accident. Originality/value The system acts as a single umbrella of control and administration for efficient and effective oil spill accident management and enhances oil spill accident early warning and alert mechanisms. The system will also enhance decision supports for quick emergency responses and improve real‐time communication and information sharing between responsible agencies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".