MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747478368 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1855

Communicating about the Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide – Comparing Public Outreach for CO2 EOR and Saline Storage Projects

2017· article· en· W2747478368 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsPetroleum Technology Research Centre
FundersCenovus Energy
KeywordsOutreachCarbon dioxideCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Environmental scienceGreenhouse gasPublic engagementEngineeringWaste managementBusinessPolitical scienceGeologyPublic relationsClimate changeChemistryOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engagement with the public is a critical element of ensuring the viability of CO2 geologic storage (GS) projects. But there are fundamental differences among the types of projects that result in subsurface CO2 storage; when it comes to outreach, one size may not fit all. This paper outlines the attributes for a deep saline storage project (Aquistore) in Canada with research projects related to two commercial CO2 EOR projects using anthropogenic CO2–one in Canada (Weyburn–Midale) and one in the United States (Bell Creek)–compares their basic outreach configuration and then explores key aspects of public engagement within this framework.

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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.231 · 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