MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Bayesian Network risk model for assessing oil spill recovery effectiveness in the ice-covered Northern Baltic Sea

2019· article· en· W2912699299 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Pollution Bulletin · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeVetenskapsrådetAcademy of FinlandOcean Frontier InstituteSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasEuropean Commission
KeywordsOil spillEnvironmental scienceSea iceBaltic seaBayesian networkArctic ice packOceanographyEnvironmental engineeringComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Northern Baltic Sea, as one of the few areas with busy ship traffic in ice-covered waters, is a typical sea area exposed to risk of ship accidents and oil spills in ice conditions. Therefore, oil spill capability for response and recovery in this area is required to reduce potential oil spill effects. Currently, there are no integrated, scenario-based models for oil spill response and recovery in ice conditions. This paper presents a Bayesian Network (BN) model for assessing oil spill recovery effectiveness, focusing on mechanical recovery. It aims to generate holistic understanding and insights about the oil spill-to-recovery phase, and to estimate oil recovery effectiveness in representative winter conditions. A number of test scenarios are shown and compared to get insight into the impact resulting from different oil types, spill sizes and winter conditions. The strength of evidence of the model is assessed in line with the adopted risk perspective.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
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