MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130616905 · doi:10.1260/030952407781494511

Offshore Wind: The Potential to Contribute a Quarter of UK Electricity by 2024

2007· article· en· W2130616905 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

VenueWind Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Offshore Engineering Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore wind powerQuarter (Canadian coin)Submarine pipelineElectricityMains electricityWind powerGeneral partnershipEngineeringMarine engineeringBusinessEnvironmental scienceNatural resource economicsEconomyFinanceEconomicsGeographyArchaeologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United Kingdom has very significant wind energy resources. In particular, the winds offshore could supply a major proportion of the nation's electricity requirements. Yet current offshore wind construction projects are progressing slowly. Over the next two decades, it is argued that Britain should adopt a much more ambitious programme to install many thousands of megawatts of offshore generating capacity by means of a public-private partnership, following the successful example of the offshore oil and gas industries of the 1970s and 1980s. By 2024, offshore wind could be contributing some 25% of UK electricity.

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 score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.178 · 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