MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297042699 · doi:10.1111/risa.14025

A Bayesian‐loss function‐based method in assessing loss caused by ship‐source oil spills in the arctic area

2022· article· en· W4297042699 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mawuli Afenyo, Changmin Jiang, Adolf K.Y. Ng, Paul Tae‐Woo Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversité LavalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticOil spillEnvironmental scienceSAFERFunction (biology)The arcticEnvironmental resource managementOceanographyComputer scienceEnvironmental engineeringGeologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is difficult to assess the risk of ship-source oil spills in Arctic waters for insurance purposes due to many unknowns and the lack of reliable data. However, maritime activities in the Arctic area continue to grow, indicating the urgent needs for the development of innovative methods to estimate loss from potential ship-source oil spills in the Arctic area. To fill this gap, we develop a hybrid Bayesian-loss function-based method to assess ship-source oil spill-related loss and implement an illustrative test on Baffin Island, Nunavut in Canada. The results confirm that our method can accurately assess loss and, subsequently, develop reliable insurance premiums for shipping activities in the Arctic area. This enables governmental and nongovernmental organizations alike to use the method as a reliable loss estimation mechanism for ship-source oil spills. Also, it is a valuable tool in designing measures for safer and more resilient Arctic shipping.

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 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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.026
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207