MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

3 keys to ensure the sustainability of your solar power plant

2022· article· en· W4313526334 on OpenAlexafffund
Carole Brunet, Michel A. Bouchard, Pierre Baptiste, O. Savadogo, Nicolás Merveille

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsSustainabilitySolar powerPower stationComputer sciencePower (physics)Environmental scienceEnvironmental economicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of climate change, green energies have an important place. Solar energy has gradually taken its place in the global energy mix, and investments in the operation of solar photovoltaic plants have been stimulated by a favourable market, despite the health and geopolitical crises. How can we ensure that these investments are sustainable in the sense of the United Nations’s Sustainable Development Goals? This is the objective of our study. We assessed the sustainability of large-scale, grid-connected photovoltaic solar power plants by conducting six case studies in six countries on the African continent to determine the key elements. Based on internal and external variables acting on the sustainability of on-grid solar power plants at various levels, three key areas of consideration emerged: (i) evaluation - using appropriate and qualitative evaluation tools, (ii) integration - opting for an integrated approach in the development of the investment project, and (iii) responsibility - not underestimating the corporate social responsibility in the local approach.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Acceptance of Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207