Arctic energy technologies workshop: proceedings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this ''Arctic Energy Technologies Workshop'' were threefold: To acquaint participants with the current US Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, Arctic and Offshore Research Program. To obtain information on Arctic oil and gas development problem areas, and on current and planned research. To provide an opportunity for technical information exchange among engineers, geologists, geophysicists, physical scientists, oceanographers, statisticians, analysts, and other participants engaged in similar research areas. The first section of the proceedings is the keynote address ''Current Arctic Offshore Technology'', presented by Kenneth Croasdale, of K.R. Croasdale and Associates, Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The second section of the proceedings includes 14 technical papers presented in two sessions at the Workshop: Sea Ice Research, and Seafloor/Soils Research. The third section of the proceedings includes the summaries of four work-group discussion sessions from the second day of the meeting: (1) Arctic Offshore Structures, (2) Arctic Offshore Pipelines, (3) Subice Development Systems, and (4) Polar-Capable Ice Vessels. The work groups addressed state-of-the-art, technical issues, R and D needs, and environmental concerns in these four areas. All papers in this proceedings have been processed for inclusion in the Energy Data Base.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.165 | 0.121 |
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".