MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2241611493

Year-Round Shipping in the Canadian Arctic: Ice Conditions and Regulatory Requirements

2007· article· en· W2241611493 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Ivana Kubat, Anne Collins, G.W. Timco

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsArcticThe arcticSea iceArctic ice packTransit (satellite)Environmental scienceBusinessMeteorologyEngineeringTransport engineeringGeographyOceanographyGeologyPublic transport
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive drilling programs took place in the High Arctic between 1969 and 1987. Large gas reserves were discovered with estimates of undiscovered potential up to 60 Tcf. Recently, the Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) evaluated the economics for development of gas reserves for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) and concluded that development could be viable. One of the main difficulties is to ensure that a reliable transportation system exists for bringing the gas to southern markets. Large tankers are a potential method for transit; therefore it is important to determine the year-round ice conditions that a tanker would encounter and determine the regulatory requirements based on Transport Canada Regulations. This will have a pronounced influence on the safety and on the cost of ship construction. In this paper, the historical ice conditions in shipping routes in the Canadian Arctic are analyzed. The coverage of the shipping lanes by multi-year ice is evaluated. Based on the knowledge of the year-round ice conditions that a tanker would encounter and applying Transport Canada Regulations, CAC2 is recommended as the lowest vessel class to operate on a year-round basis.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207