Bibliographic record
Abstract
On December 4, 1997, the US Department of Energy (DOE), the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization of Japan (NEDO), and the Norwegian Research Council (NRC) entered into a ''Project Agreement for International Collaboration on CO{sub 2} Ocean Sequestration''. Government organizations from Japan, Canada, and Australia, and a Swiss/Swedish engineering firm later joined the agreement, which outlined a research strategy for ocean carbon sequestration via direct injection. The members agreed to an initial field experiment, with the hope that if the initial experiment was successful, there would be subsequent field evaluations of increasingly larger scale to evaluate environmental impacts of sequestration and the potential for commercialization. This report is a summary of the evolution of the collaborative effort, the supporting research, and results for the International Collaboration on CO{sub 2} Ocean Sequestration. Almost 100 papers and reports resulted from this collaboration, including 18 peer reviewed journal articles, 46 papers, 28 reports, and 4 graduate theses. A full listing of these publications is in the reference section.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.131 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".