Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The Vancouver International Airport (the Airport) is Canada's second busiest airport, handling approximately 16 million passengers, 370,000 aircraft movements. and 1.5 billion liters (400 million gallons) of aviation fuel annually. The Airport is located on an island in the estuary of the Fraser River, a major migration corridor for salmon. The Fraser River estuary is on the Pacific Flyway. Twice in the past 20 years, a major fuel spill on the Airport has reached the Fraser River. The Vancouver International Airport Authority's (Airport Authority) Environmental Emergency Response Program places a dual emphasis on prevention and emergency response. Key objectives include:Fostering cooperation among tenants, response agencies, and the Airport AuthorityEnsuring a quick, safe, and effective response to spillsReducing the severity and frequency of spills One of the program tools used, and the subject of this paper, is a tabletop exercise. A tabletop exercise brings together various response organizations in an environment where a scripted scenario can be worked from the comfort of a meeting room. The Airport Authority has used tabletop exercises for the past 8 years to practice various emergency scenarios that can occur at an airport (e.g., plane crashes, bomb threats, and hazardous material incidents). The frequency of exercises is planned. The specific scenario to be exercised purposely is not identified too far in advance, allowing for a timely response to actual incidents or near incidents. For example, a tenant had a major fuel spill involving a mobile refueler. The incident response was well managed, with the tenant undertaking responsibility for the long-term site remediation. However, other fueling tenants were not sure they were as well prepared. Therefore, the next tabletop exercise was tailored to allow all fuel-handling tenants, including government agencies and Airport Authority response management to take part in an event mimicking the actual spill, thus adding an element of reality and urgency to the tabletop exercise. Participants appreciate the opportunity to participate in the tabletop exercises. They come away with a solid understanding of their responsibilities and what resources they would bring to a real incident. Most of all, it is an opportunity for the individuals who have taken part in an actual incident to share their experience. While there continues to be more effort on preventing hazardous material spills, well-scripted and facilitated tabletop exercises are excellent tools for preparing for the real thing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.086 | 0.024 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".