MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203532894 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-757671/v1

Selected ‘Starter Kit’ energy system modelling data for Philippines (#CCG)

2021· preprint· en· W3203532894 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy Allington, Carla Cannone, Ioannis Pappis, Karla Cervantes Barron, Will Usher, Steve Pye, Edward Brown, Mark Howells, Taco Niet, Miriam Zachau Walker, Aniq Ahsan, Flora Charbonnier, Claire Halloran, Stephanie Hirmer, Constantinos Taliotis, Caroline Sundin, Vignesh Sridha, Eunice Ramos, Maarten Brinkerink, Paul Deane, Andrii Gritsevskyi, Gustavo Moura, David Wogan, Edito Barcelona, Holger Rogner

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeUniversidade Federal de Ouro PretoGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsStarterBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Energy system modelling can be used to assess the implications of different scenarios and support improved policymaking. However, access to data is often a barrier to energy system modelling, causing delays. Therefore, this article provides data that can be used to create a simple zero order energy system model for Philippines, which can act as a starting point for further model development and scenario analysis. The data are collected entirely from publicly available and accessible sources, including the websites and databases of international organizations, journal articles, and existing modelling studies. This means that the dataset can be easily updated based on the latest available information or more detailed and accurate local data. These data were also used to calibrate a simple energy system model using the Open Source Energy Modelling System (OSeMOSYS) and three stylized scenarios (Fossil Future, Least Cost and Net Zero by 2050) for 2020–2050. The assumptions used and results of these scenarios are presented in the appendix as an illustrative example of what can be done with these data. This simple model can be adapted and further developed by in-country analysts and academics, providing a platform for future work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.012

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207