MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062210044 · doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2001-1-209

Challenges Associated with Oil Spill Response in Remote Regions of Western Alaska

2001· article· en· W2062210044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
W. J. Hutmacher, R. Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayPeninsulaOceanographyArcticSubarctic climateGeographyCircumpolar starBeaufort seaLongitudeLatitudeArchipelagoBeaufort scaleNautical mileGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Western Alaska is, to say the least, remote. The area is vast, unforgiving at times, and notorious for offering rugged coastlines, severe weather conditions, and home to numerous species of birds, marine and terrestrial mammals, and fish. To get an understanding of the size of this state, Alaska spans about 20 degrees of latitude (1,200 miles) and more than 45 degrees of longitude (2,700 miles). The coastline area runs from Cape Puget in the Gulf of Alaska to the Alaska Peninsula, to the Aleutian Islands thence north to Barrow including, the Bering and Chukchi Seas, and thence east through the Beaufort Sea to the U.S.-Canada border. Traveling north to south, the region is classified as arctic, subarctic, or marine coastal. This paper will discuss the challenges faced by federal, state, and local agencies, and responders while responding to vessel casualties in the remote regions of Alaska. The geographic area of the state this paper will focus on is known as Western Alaska and is composed of the Alaska Peninsula, Aleutian Islands, the islands of Bristol Bay, and Pribilof Islands. The bodies of water surrounding Western Alaska are the Gulf of Alaska, North Pacific Ocean, Bristol Bay, and Bering Sea.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207