MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510510799

A Review of the BC Wind Power Project Acoustic Assessment Guidelines

2016· review· en· W2510510799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brigette Martin, Mark Bliss

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineChristian ministryWind powerResource (disambiguation)EngineeringPresentation (obstetrics)Impact assessmentEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceMedicineElectrical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO), Ministry of Energy and Mines and the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) jointly published the guideline Best Practice for Wind Power Project Acoustic Assessment in 2012. This document makes recommendations in three areas: interpretation of the Wind Policy criteria, requirements of assessment reports and predictive modelling techniques. The purpose of this presentation is to discuss and critique the requirements of this guideline. A case study will be used to illustrate the variability in noise prediction results that are possible while meeting the requirements of the guideline, in comparison to other published best practice guidance.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207