MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366086895 · doi:10.1038/s41597-023-02094-2

CarbonMonitor-Power near-real-time monitoring of global power generation on hourly to daily scales

2023· article· en· W4366086895 on OpenAlexaff
Biqing Zhu, Zhu Deng, Xuanren Song, Wenli Zhao, Da Huo, Taochun Sun, Piyu Ke, Duo Cui, Chenxi Lu, Haiwang Zhong, Chaopeng Hong, Jian Qiu, Steven J. Davis, Pierre Gentine, Philippe Ciais, Zhu Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHudbay Minerals (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationTsinghua UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRenewable energyEnvironmental scienceWind powerSolar powerMeteorologyElectricity generationRange (aeronautics)Fossil fuelClimatologyGeographyPower (physics)EcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We constructed a frequently updated, near-real-time global power generation dataset: CarbonMonitor-Power since January, 2016 at national levels with near-global coverage and hourly-to-daily time resolution. The data presented here are collected from 37 countries across all continents for eight source groups, including three types of fossil sources (coal, gas, and oil), nuclear energy and four groups of renewable energy sources (solar energy, wind energy, hydro energy and other renewables including biomass, geothermal, etc.). The global near-real-time power dataset shows the dynamics of the global power system, including its hourly, daily, weekly and seasonal patterns as influenced by daily periodical activities, weekends, seasonal cycles, regular and irregular events (i.e., holidays) and extreme events (i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic). The CarbonMonitor-Power dataset reveals that the COVID-19 pandemic caused strong disruptions in some countries (i.e., China and India), leading to a temporary or long-lasting shift to low carbon intensity, while it had only little impact in some other countries (i.e., Australia). This dataset offers a large range of opportunities for power-related scientific research and policy-making.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207