MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184772156

AAPG HEDBERG CONFERENCE Geological Carbon Sequestration: Prediction and Verification August 16-19, 2009 - Vancouver, BC, Canada The CO2 Storage Potential of the Canterbury-Otago Region, New Zealand

2010· article· en· W2184772156 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Mockler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySubmarine pipelineCretaceousStructural basinFoothillsOil shaleCoal measuresDrillingOceanographyPaleontologyGeochemistryMining engineeringGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geological storage of CO2 has been identified as a viable means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere. This study evaluates the CO2 storage potential of the onshore Canterbury-Otago region of the South Island, New Zealand. The impetus for the study is that North Otago currently hosts a lime works which may soon be joined by a coal-fired cement works. The combined CO2 emissions generated could be ~0.95 Mt per annum. The early Canterbury Basin (Figure 1) developed as a passive margin following Late Cretaceous seafloor spreading in the Tasman Sea. Transpression between Australian and Pacific tectonic plates then reversed subsidence onshore and deformed existing Tertiary strata. Uplift of the Southern Alps since the Mid-Late Miocene has resulted in rapid sedimentation east of the foothills. These events have produced reservoir-seal pairs suitable for CO2 storage and containment. Investigation of some of these reservoir units has resulted in only sub-commercial hydrocarbon discoveries. However, three structural closures were identified that have the potential to trap CO2.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207