MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230023958 · doi:10.2172/1779820

Towards improved guidelines for cost evaluation of carbon capture and storage

2021· report· en· W4230023958 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Roussanaly, Edward S. Rubin, Mijndert Der Spek, George Booras, Niels Berghout, Timothy Fout, Monica Garcia, Stefania Gardarsdottir, Vishalini Nair Kuncheekanna, Michael Matuszewski, Sean McCoy, Joshua Morgan, Shareq Mohd Nazir, Andrea Ramírez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivity-based costingQuality assuranceProcess (computing)Computer scienceWhite paperCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Set (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)Operations managementEngineeringBusinessAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The white paper is an effort to draw up a set of CCS costing guidelines in three complementary areas where further guidelines and better practices are needed, and where efforts are underway to address those topics. The first area of study tackles the establishment of improved guidelines for cost evaluation of advanced low-carbon technology (such as a new CO2 capture process or a novel power plant design). The second area of study focuses on CCS from non-power industries while the final area addresses quality assurance and uncertainty evaluations of data and models used in CCS cost analysis.

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)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0090.004
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207