Bibliographic record
Abstract
The White Rose Extension Project is pursued by Husky Energy, and it will be completed by 2016 or 2017. The project is mainly used by extending the field of White Rose platform. There are two options to finish this project well. One option is using the wellhead platform to further extend the field; the other one is using much more subsea drill to finish this task. Unfortunately, Husky Energy does not decide which one should be applied for the project. The wellhead platform is more stable and safe than subsea drill in the White Rose field. Because the wellhead platform is fixed at the offshore site, it will not be affected seriously by kinds of environmental conditions. Subsea drill will be much more dangerous in the harsh environment of the White Rose field. No matter how good the wellhead platform is, it has a terrible problem which cannot be avoided. Because the designed wellhead platform will be too large, it will cost too much work hours and money. It is not easy to decide which option will be the better one. The following details will provide the advantage, disadvantage and challenge for these two options. The paper will also provide which option should be a better choice for such significant White Rose Extension Project.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".