Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas hydrates are solid-like substances naturally occurring beneath the oceans and in polar regions. They contain vast, and potentially unstable, reserves of methane and other natural gases. Many believe that, if released in the environment, the methane from hydrates would be a considerable hazard to marine ecosystems, coastal populations and infrastructures, or worse, that it would dangerously contribute to global warming. On the other hand, hydrates may contain enough natural gas to provide an energy supply assurance for the 21st century. This paper attempts to separate the myths, the facts and the issues that relate to natural gas hydrates beyond the doomsday environmental scenarios and overly optimistic estimates. To cite this article: B. Beauchamp, C. R. Geoscience 336 (2004). Les hydrates de gaz, substances solides qui ressemblent à la glace, existent de façon naturelle sous les océans et dans les régions polaires. Les hydrates contiennent de grandes réserves de méthane, et autres gaz naturels, qui sont potentiellement instables. D'aucuns croient que le méthane des hydrates offrirait un risque considérable pour les écosystèmes marins, les populations côtières et les infrastructures humaines s'il était relâché dans l'environnement, ou pire encore, qu'il contribuerait dangereusement au réchauffement global. Par contre, les hydrates pourraient contenir assez de gaz naturel pour constituer une source énergétique fiable au XXIème siècle. Cet article s'efforce de séparer, au-delà des scénarios environnementaux alarmistes et des évaluations trop optimistes du volume des ressources énergétiques, les mythes, la réalité et les enjeux gravitant autour des hydrates de gaz naturels. Pour citer cet article : B. Beauchamp, C. R. Geoscience 336 (2004).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".