MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981844573 · doi:10.1115/1.1287034

Evaluation and Application of Data Sources for Assessing Operating Costs for Mechanical Drive Gas Turbines in Pipeline Service

2000· article· en· W1981844573 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony J. Smalley, David A. Mauney, D.I. Ash, Sam L. Clowney, George P. Pappas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUnion Gas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHorsepowerGas turbinesAutomotive engineeringPipeline (software)Pipeline transportEngineeringWork (physics)Service (business)Fuel gasReliability engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates and demonstrates how the public domain data provided by individual interstate pipeline companies to FERC, when combined with individual company equipment lists, can be used to regress industry information on cost of operations and maintenance, fuel gas used, and cost of fuel and power. The paper describes the methods of analysis and identifies their limitations. The paper presents results of such regression analysis as average and variance of cost and fuel usage for industrial gas turbines and aeroderivative gas turbines. It provides further comparisons between gas turbine prime movers, reciprocating engine prime movers, and electric motor drives, and presents annual costs per installed horsepower as a function of turbine size. The paper is based on work performed for PRC International and the Gas Research Institute. [S0742-4795(00)01003-6]

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0160.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicAdvanced Power Generation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207