MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202957722

Canadian grid code for wind development : review and recommendations

2006· article· en· W3202957722 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M P LeBlanc, Leigh Evans, Paul Gardner, Nokleby Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerGrid codeGridInterconnectionElectricityScale (ratio)TelecommunicationsElectric power transmissionComputer scienceMeteorologyEngineeringBusinessGeographyElectrical engineeringCartography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) has launched an initiative to design the interconnection of utility-scale wind farms to provincial electricity transmission grids. Currently, Canadian provinces operate mostly in isolation along their own time frames to develop interconnection requirements for wind turbines and wind farms. This can lead to different sets of requirements and rules, particularly at the transmission level of 69 kV and higher. CanWEA hired Garrad Hassan Canada Inc. (GH) to study and resolve the issue. GH recommended that CanWEA adopt its proposed baseline Canadian Wind Interconnection Grid Code as a starting point to harmonize the various requirements in each province. The proposed code incorporates existing codes developed in Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and through the American Wind Energy Association. refs., tabs., figs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0150.024
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.010

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicPower Systems and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207