MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038048294 · doi:10.1002/prs.12173

Flag on the play, delay of game

2020· article· en· W3038048294 on OpenAlexaff
John W. Herber

Bibliographic record

VenueProcess Safety Progress · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsStillwater (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Process safetyRisk analysis (engineering)Operations managementComputer scienceBusinessWork in processEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many process safety systems are aimed at attaining and maintaining normal operation. How to maintain a safe process during abnormal operation is more difficult to assess. Initiating events that could cause abnormal operation are varied and they are easily overlooked or discarded as highly improbable. There is a netherworld when operations are suspended or the process is on hold. Hold can be a distillation unit that is placed on total reflux or a reactive process where the process is not at reaction conditions; perhaps reactant additions have been suspended. The assumption is that the process remains at a static condition until we want it to resume. The proverb, “Time and tide waits for no man” should have also included chemical reactions. While some upset causes are not preventable, they can be anticipated and plans developed to safely manage the process until normal operation can resume. Maintenance activities are also prone to increased risk due to delayed or suspended operations. All of these situations have warning signs that can be recognized, but only if an effort is made to assess the situation and develop plans to safely manage the process through the delay.

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)0.009
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.010

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcess Safety ProgressSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207