MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007030392 · doi:10.1177/0270467608315942

Wind Power in Ontario

2008· article· en· W2007030392 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsNSCAD UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)MeteorologyElectricityWind speedTurbineElectricity demandElectricity generationGeographyPower (physics)EngineeringEconomicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to investigate wind turbine production, the variability of that production, and the relationship between output and system-wide demand. A review of the literature reveals that a variety of measures (and methods) to explore the variability of wind power production exist. Attention then turns to the province of Ontario (Canada), and the performances of four wind farms are examined for 2006 and 2007. Key conclusions include that the wind farms' capacity factors vary from 27.6% to 35.6%, with higher values in winter as compared to summer; wind power performs better than the seasonal average during peak periods; wind is a better “partner” for the Ontario electricity system in the winter as opposed to the summer; and the increased geographic distribution of wind farms decreases their collective variability.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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