MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069978639 · doi:10.1061/41095(365)59

Pamper Bacteria, They Will Help Us: Application of Biochemical Mechanisms in Geo-Environmental Engineering

2010· article· en· W2069978639 on OpenAlexaff
John Lambert, Kent Novakowski, Maaike Blauw, Marcel Latil, Lasiba Knight, Leydis Contreras Bayona

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoFlorida 2010 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pamper bacteria, they will help us: this sounds like a fairy tale that mothers tell their children. No way. These small creatures will help us, if we pamper them. This paper contains two very different cases where fairy tales come true. Feed the bacteria in an intelligent way and they will do the same work for us as traditional methods would, but with much less energy, materials and at lower costs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoFlorida 2010Same topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207