MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108568262 · doi:10.1109/mele.2020.3026438

Renewable Energy Integration in Canadian Remote Community Microgrids: The Feasibility of Hydrogen and Gas Generation

2020· article· en· W3108568262 on OpenAlex
Enrique Gabriel Vera, Claudio A. Cañizares, Mehrdad Pirnia

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Electrification Magazine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicHybrid Renewable Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyElectricityFossil fuelElectricity generationEnergy sourceNatural gasMains electricityElectricity retailingBusinessNatural resource economicsPopulationEnergy developmentEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringWaste managementEconomicsElectricity marketPower (physics)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 1.1 Billion, or 14%, of the global population do not have access to electricity due to the challenges associated with energy supply. Around 84% of those without electricity access reside in rural areas, with more than 95% being in sub-Saharan Africa and the developing parts of Asia. In Canada, about 72% of off-grid aboriginal and nonaboriginal communities use fossil fuel (oil: 71%, natural gas: 0.8%) as their main source of electricity generation, and only 4.7% of these communities rely on renewable energy sources (RES). In addition, 17.9% fulfill their energy demand through interconnections with other communities as they don?t have enough resources to support their own needs. The remaining 5.6% are reported to rely on unknown sources of electricity (see Arriaga et?al. 2014).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.212 · 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