MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233045758 · doi:10.2172/925709

Wind Powering America FY07 Activities Summary

2008· report· en· W4233045758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitPolitical scienceState (computer science)Private sectorPublic administrationEconomic historyLibrary scienceEconomyGeographyHistoryPhysical geographyEconomicsLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wind Powering America FY07 Activities Summary reflects the accomplishments of our state wind working groups, our programs at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and our partner organizations. The national WPA team remains a leading force for moving wind energy forward in the United States. WPA continues to work with its national, regional, and state partners to communicate the opportunities and benefits of wind energy to a diverse set of stakeholders. WPA now has 30 state wind working groups (welcoming Georgia and Wisconsin in 2007) that form strategic alliances to communicate wind's benefits to the state stakeholders. More than 140 members of national and state public and private sector organizations from 39 U.S. states and Canada attended the 6th Annual WPA All-States Summit in Los Angeles in June. WPA's emphasis remains on the rural agricultural sector, which stands to reap the significant economic development benefits of wind energy development. Additionally, WPA continues its program of outreach, education, and technical assistance to Native American communities, public power entities, and regulatory and legislative bodies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.049

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207