MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248517624 · doi:10.1080/14888386.2000.9712503

Living off the grid: How to survive ice storms and other natural disasters

2000· article· en· W4248517624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal warmingGreenhouse gasClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementNatural disasterNatural (archaeology)ArcticStormGeographyNatural resource economicsMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceOceanographyEconomicsGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors of this paper live and run a business from a solar-powered home in rural Ontario, Canada. They welcome comments or questions, but for personal reasons, have requested that their names be withheld. If any reader wishes to contact them, please send a note to the Managing Editor (address on page 1). Most North Americans will never live “off the grid,” but this short article inspires all of us “on the grid” to pay attention to our energy consumption. Just by turning off the lights, everybody can help maintain a healthy ecosphere. And we could begin, one by one, establishing our own rooftop power system to replace or supplement grid-based power. Global warming from greenhouse gases, partly due to coal and other fossil-fuel powered electric power generation, is already shrinking vast areas of the sea-ice ecosytem in the Arctic and bleaching or killing large areas of coral reefs in the Indian, Pacific, and Atlantic Oceans. In short, the impacts of global warming on biodiversity has emerged from theory to the real world.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.178
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

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversitySame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207