MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018966235 · doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2014.1.50

25 years of collaboration: the Pacific States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force 1989–2014

2014· article· en· W2018966235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Brace

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask forceOil spillBARGEWest coastTask (project management)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceEngineeringOceanographyEnvironmental sciencePublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Two significant west coast spill incidents, the barge Nestucca spill in B.C. in 1988 and the tanker Exxon Valdez spill of 1989 catalyzed the formal creation of the Pacific States/British Columbia Oil Spill Task Force, a union of Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. Hawaii joined 12 years later and for the past 25 years the Task Force member organizations have collaborated on numerous projects and policy initiatives that have significantly influenced how the west coast prevents, prepares for and responds to oil spills. This paper will: 1) Provide an overview of how the Task Force functions and how it fosters collaboration between industry, agencies, and other stakeholders in the region; 2) Highlight key projects and accomplishments from the past two decades, including Transboundary coordination, vessel traffic risk studies, mutual aid agreements, and federal regulatory oversight; and how these projects were initiated and carried out; 3) Offer examples of how the Task Force is looking at challenges ahead, such as the shifting landscape of energy transportation and emerging fuels in the region, and what this means for spill prevention and response.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207