MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210443063 · doi:10.1049/pbpo169e_ch12

Development and experience with a vertical-axis hydrokinetic power generation system

2021· book-chapter· en· W4210443063 on OpenAlex
Clayton Bear, Michael Bear

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitution of Engineering and Technology eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyMarine engineeringComputer scienceGeographyEngineeringEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter Contents: 12.1 Introduction 12.2 History 12.3 Technology 12.4 Applications 12.5 System configuration 12.6 Development program 12.6.1 Early days 12.6.2 Novel approach 12.7 Initial prototypes 12.7.1 Pointe du Bois test program 12.8 First-generation designs 12.8.1 New bearing concept 12.9 Second-generation designs 12.9.1 Impact on aquatic life 12.10 Tidal deployments 12.11 Summary 12.12 Case studies 12.12.1 Ringmo, Nepal 12.12.2 Hpa-An, Myanmar References

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.169 · 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