MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062334738 · doi:10.1002/prs.11559

Replacement of <scp>HCFC</scp> ‐22 Refrigerants with Ammonia: A Challenge for Hockey Arenas in Quebec

2013· article· en· W2062334738 on OpenAlexaffabout
J.P. Lacoursière, Camille E. Dumas

Bibliographic record

VenueProcess Safety Progress · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolRefrigerantOzone layerRefrigerationEnvironmental scienceOzoneAmmoniaWaste managementPopulationTreatyEngineeringEnvironmental protectionChemistryMeteorologyPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental healthLawMechanical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the use of a number of substances responsible for ozone depletion. The protocol was adopted in 1987 and covers among other substances, HCFC‐22 used as refrigerants. The Canadian governments (federal and provincials) have put in place legislations to phase out and prohibit the use, production, and importation of HCFC‐22 substances and equipment using HCFC‐22 as refrigerant. Refrigeration systems are used in over 500 hockey arenas in the province of Quebec and 400 of them have to be modified to use a more ozone friendly refrigerant, that is, ammonia. Therefore, the risk associated with these sites is a major concern for the population due to their close proximity. The article presents approaches that are used to reduce the risk to an acceptable level for the neighbors and users. © 2013 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog 32: 78–83, 2013

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcess Safety ProgressSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207