MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Resourcing the next industry defining spill

2021· article· en· W4205875723 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Marie Hall, Dave Rouse, Paul Foley, Aaron Montgomery

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsLoyalist College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilityTransparency (behavior)PreparednessSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Scale (ratio)Emergency responseIncident responseBusinessOil spillComputer sciencePublic relationsComputer securityPolitical scienceGeographyMedicineEnvironmental protection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) response was unprecedented in scale and complexity. In addition to testing the limits of Industry's technical knowledge, it required a sustained response of personnel effort over several years. At the peak of the response, some 47,000+ responders were deployed across five states. For any future incident of similar scale the challenges of resourcing must be considered now, to ensure a timely, efficient and effective response can be achieved. Whilst the contribution of every responder is important, it is clear that some command and field roles are more critical than others. For these key roles there are a limited number of individuals with the knowledge, experience, credibility and personality to successfully take them on. Furthermore, accessing these individuals - having up-to-date contact details, maintaining business continuity and assuring their competency - is a challenge. Another common preparedness gap is that most exercises do not test the process for mobilising people past the first few days (thereby not learning lessons about the time it takes) or consider the challenge of putting people in place with the right skill set during a prolonged response. DWH was resourced using the ‘little black book' of contacts from oil spill response organisations (OSROs), Oil and Gas operators, scientific experts and the local communities. Whilst successful, there were lessons to learn from the approach. In the last 10 years the expectations from regulators, public and other stakeholders on the speed, transparency and effectiveness of response have multiplied. To meet these growing expectations a more robust and efficient way of putting the right people, in the right place at the right time is required. This poster discusses the merits and suggests a potential mechanism for a globally aligned mutual response network. Oil spill response cooperatives are ideally positioned to identify key roles, the people who could fill them, assure their capability and readiness, and address the barriers which slow down mobilisation such as agreeing contracting terms and rates. This poster will lay out the challenges that both Industry and OSROs face in resourcing the next industry defining spill. It will set out how an oil spill mutual response network answers these questions. It will also reinforce why collaboration and cooperation, key principles of Tiered Preparedness and Response, will continue to be the most efficient and effective way of accessing capability and maximising Industry's preparedness to respond to the next big incident.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.587
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207