MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037755191 · doi:10.1108/ijesm-01-2020-0010

Solar energy analysis in use and implementation in Mexico: a review

2020· review· en· W3037755191 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Alejandro Silva Rodrí­guez de San Miguel, María Antonieta Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Energy Sector Management · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityChecklistRanking (information retrieval)Solar energyScale (ratio)StakeholderScopusData scienceComputer scienceEngineeringPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologySocial scienceGeographyPsychologyQualitative researchInformation retrievalCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse how solar energy is harnessed and implemented in Mexico. This paper presents a diachronic analysis of the divergent literature presented into the subject with the themes being divided substantially. Design/methodology/approach This paper used at least five methods in the identification of the studies with the first being the use of the SCImago Institution Ranking followed by the use of Scopus for journal evaluation. SCImago was used to determine the efficiency of the journals with the Newcastle Ottawa scale allowing for the evaluation of the different case study articles presented on Mexico. The fourth tool was a 21-item STROBE checklist after which the Web of Science was used to determine the authenticity levels of the identified articles. Findings The implementation of solar energy technologies is still novel in Mexico with private and public entities working together towards building sustainable options. In addition, it cites the divergent merits that might stem from the use of solar energy technologies. Originality/value A myriad of articles has been presented concerning solar energy in Mexico, but no attempt has been made to synthesize the evidence and arguments made in this significant body of research. The subsequent review is original with its findings being valuable for current and future research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Energy Sector ManagementSame topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207