MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055186687 · doi:10.1260/0144598041217338

Turkey's Coal Reserves, Potential Trends and Pollution Problems of Turkey

2004· article· en· W2055186687 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Exploration & Exploitation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalConsumption (sociology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Natural resource economicsEnergy consumptionAgricultural economicsPollutionEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEconomicsGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Turkey, for nearly two decades, has been one of the fastest growing power markets in the world. Turkey's total energy consumption, around half is used by the industrial sector, a quarter in residential, and the rest in transportation and commercial. Turkey's domestic energy consumption has more than tripled, reaching a level of 3.2 quadrillion Btu (quads) and coal accounted for 31% of total energy consumption in year 2000. Turkey's coal reserves are 0.6% of the world reserves. Rich lignite deposits are spread all over the country. Total lignite reserves are estimated at 8075 Mtoe, of which 7339 Mtoe (88%) is economically feasible. Lignite extraction is expected to increase as the government feels pressure to close down unprofitable hard coal mines that are geologically difficult, increasing the cost of extraction.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.185 · 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