MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042583254

Statusrapport om coanda-inntak

2020· article· no· W3042583254 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Audun Kiil, Rasmus Liebig-Andersen, Alessandro Davitti, Evjen

Bibliographic record

VenueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageno
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Educational Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For å øke kunnskapen om drift og erfaringer med coanda-inntak gjennomførte NVE en spørreundersøkelse om dette i 2019. Undersøkelsen ble sendt til samtlige konsesjonsgitte småkraftverk med coanda-inntak som er satt i drift. Multiconsult har sammenstilt svarene fra undersøkelsen. 30 kraftverk har deltatt, og gjennomsnittlig driftserfaring er litt over to år. De fleste kraftverkseiere er tilfredse med coanda-løsningen, til tross for utfordringer knyttet til blant annet isdannelse og algevekst. Rapporten sammenstiller også erfaringer fra drift av coanda-inntak i Skottland og Canada

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.233 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo)Same topicSocial and Educational SciencesFrench-language works237,207