MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775590347 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v13-n2-307-315

Managers for sustainable electric power industry of tomorrow

2018· article· en· W2775590347 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
L. D. Gitelman, L.M. Gitelman, Mikhail Kozhevnikov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric power industryElectric powerBusinessPower (physics)Sustainable developmentEngineeringElectrical engineeringElectricityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To be able to lead a large-scale technological overhaul of the electricity generation sector and actively operate in energy markets, it is necessary to substantially increase the professional level of management. Moreover, there is no doubt that the social responsibility of power engineering as a vital infrastructure industry will only continue to increase, competition will intensify while the existing shortage of knowledge will grow. This is happening amid overall instability, uneven and chaotic demand for energy on the part of economic systems. On the other hand, energy consumers, investors and society as a whole are putting an increasing emphasis on reliability, pricing transparency and environmental impacts. The study provides substantiation and a new research and methodology platform for forward-looking education of energy managers. Its purpose is to equip professionals with knowledge and competencies that they will need for working in emerging technological and organisational and economic systems that will be based on new principles and will function in a turbulent external environment. The global energy education is used as an example of building educational content and methodology for the forward-looking training of future energy leaders.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207