MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926949079 · doi:10.1109/cjece.2018.2885016

A Guideline of Feasibility Analysis and Design for Concentrated Solar Power Plants

2018· article· en· W2926949079 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcentrated solar powerGuidelineParabolic troughPhotovoltaic systemPower stationSoftwareSystems engineeringSolar powerReliability engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringProcess engineeringPower (physics)Solar energyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To resolve power crisis and reduce environmental effect of conventional power generation, a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant is a viable solution. This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of four different CSP plant configurations, offers a comparison between CSP technologies and solar photovoltaic power plants, and proposes a general guideline for feasibility analysis and design of CSP plants. The detailed technical and financial specifications and analysis for setting up a parabolic trough-type CSP plant in Chittagong, Bangladesh, are provided as a case study. The simulation is carried out using the software known as “System Advisor Model.” This paper can serve as an important guideline for the future CSP plant design.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.199 · 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