MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138283716 · doi:10.1139/a2012-002

A review of ballast water management practices and challenges in harsh and arctic environments

2012· review· en· W2138283716 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Liang Jing, Bing Chen, Baiyu Zhang, Hongxuan Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallastEnvironmental scienceContext (archaeology)ArcticPollutantEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental engineeringOceanographyEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ballast water is carried by cruise ships, large tankers, and bulk cargo carriers to acquire the optimum operating depth of the propeller and to maintain maneuverability and stability. Recently, ballast water has been recognized as wastewater that is responsible for ocean pollution due to the worldwide transfer of non-indigenous species, pathogenic bacteria, and other pollutants via ballast water discharge. This poses serious environmental, ecological, and economic threats to both coastal communities and the marine environment. To address these negative impacts and concerns, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has codified and adopted a series of guidelines to minimize pollution and adverse effects caused by ballast water. A number of treatment technologies have been developed and applied in field practices to remove solids, particulates, organic pollutants, and organisms from ballast water, showing certain advantages and limitations. Many other management practices, such as ballast water exchange (BWE), shipping routes optimization, treatment process modeling, and risk assessment are in high demand to aid onboard treatment systems. However, knowledge and technical gaps still exist regarding the implementation of ballast water management practices especially in the context of arctic and harsh environments under changing climatic conditions. Records indicate that most coastal regions in the north have been invaded by unwanted species via ballast water discharge in the past decades. The North Atlantic and the Arctic Oceans have much colder climates and more extreme weather conditions than low latitudes. The discharge of untreated or less treated ballast water could cause much more severe damage to the local environment and hence pose higher risks to ecosystems and even human health, particularly in the context of climate change. Based on a comprehensive literature review, this study proposed a risk-based fuzzy–stochastic–interval programming decision support system to help eliminate environmental, ecological, as well as health threats from the discharge of ballast water, particularly in the north where weather, space, timing, maintenance, and cost are major concerns.

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207