MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296961994 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.1.3184.5286

An Analysis of the Ontario Power Authority's Consideration of Environmental Sustainability in Electricity System Planning

2008· article· en· W2296961994 on OpenAlex
Robert Gibson, Mark Winfield, Tanya Markvart, Kyrke Gaudreau, J. Eric T. Taylor

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

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityElectricityEnvironmental planningBusinessEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEconomicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report focuses on the Ontario Power Authority’s (OPA) consideration of environmental sustainability in the development of the proposed Integrated Power System Plan (IPSP). The research was centred on a comparison of what the OPA did with what should reasonably be expected of the OPA in meeting the requirement, contained in Ontario Regulation 277/06 (The IPSP Regulation), for ensuring due consideration of environmental sustainability in plan development. In its decision on issues to be considered in the IPSP hearing, the Ontario Energy Board indicated that in order to meet this requirement the OPA is required to demonstrate that it has “weighed and evaluated” environmental sustainability in a way that is “meaningful” in the development of the IPSP.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.167 · 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