MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014460467 · doi:10.1115/ipc2002-27305

Reclamation of National Energy Board Regulated Pipeline Rights of Way: A Life Cycle Approach

2002· article· en· W2014460467 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kent Lien

Bibliographic record

Venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanada Energy Regulator
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand reclamationMandatePipeline (software)Process (computing)Pipeline transportLegislationAuditBusinessAbandonment (legal)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceAccountingPolitical scienceEnvironmental engineeringLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of its mandate, the National Energy Board (NEB) regulates the construction, operation, and abandonment of interprovincial and international pipelines. The primary legislation which directly and indirectly addresses reclamation of NEB lines are the National Energy Board Act and the associated Onshore Pipeline Regulations, 1999, and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The NEB uses a life cycle approach to pursue appropriate reclamation of disturbed rights of way. Initially, reclamation related issues are addressed at the application stage. Subsequent to the application process, the actual implementation of reclamation measures occurs during construction of the line. Success of reclamation is monitored during the operational life of a line through inspection and auditing procedures, with additional measures being implemented as necessary.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and BSame topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207