MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592280594 · doi:10.1080/15567249.2011.592901

Qualification of essential components of a FIT scheme

2016· article· en· W2592280594 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sources Part B Economics Planning and Policy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy Efficiency and Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Department of Agriculture
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasTariffEnvironmental economicsRenewable energyElectricityBureaucracyGovernment (linguistics)BusinessCoalDemographicsNatural resource economicsEconomicsEngineeringWaste managementPolitical scienceInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACTA study was completed to examine the effectiveness of feed-in tariff (FIT) policy as a mechanism to encourage renewable energy (RE) development. Nine regions were selected with various time frames of RE policy development, demographics, and natural resources for comparison of RE success. Results are based on installed capacity and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. This aticle presents three main themes which successful FIT policy incorporates to encourage rapid RE uptake: 1. tariffs based on a reasonable rate of return, 2. government commitment to the policy, and 3. minimization of bureaucratic processes. This is demonstrated by comparing information from various regions around the world. Other observed benefits of RE installations include GHG mitigation compared to conventional electricity generation mechanisms such as coal.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.238 · 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