MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884799424 · doi:10.1115/1.2003-feb-2

Current From Currents

2003· article· en· W2884799424 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gayle Ehrenman

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)TurbineRenewable energyWind powerMarine engineeringElectricity generationPower (physics)Marine energyEngineeringElectrical engineeringGenerator (circuit theory)Environmental scienceMechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses that in the quest for renewable energy, the oceans’ tides and flow have gone largely untapped. Companies in the United Kingdom and Canada are trying to harvest the power of sea current through new application of an old technology: turbines. IT Power is using technology from its spin-off company, Marine Current Turbines, also in Hampshire. The technology consists of a pair of axial flow rotors that are roughly 50 to 65 feet in diameter. Each drives a generator via a gearbox, much like a wind turbine. Blue Energy Canada is also working the currents. Its approach differs from that of IT Power in two significant ways: orientation of the turbine blades and their arrangement. A study conducted in 2001 by Triton Consultants, based in Vancouver, BC, on behalf of BC Hydro (one of the largest electrical utilities in Canada), found that the cost to develop a current turbine site is rather high, but the cost of annual power generation would be low. The study considered a site at the Discovery Passage in British Columbia, which it speculated would run 7941-MW Marine Current Turbines spread over roughly 3922 acres.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1170.035

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical EngineeringSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207