MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383226627 · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2023.105777

Beyond engineering: A review of reservoir management through the lens of wickedness, competing objectives and uncertainty

2023· review· en· W4383226627 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Modelling & Software · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsWickednessRisk analysis (engineering)Order (exchange)Control (management)Reservoir engineeringEnvironmental resource managementManagement scienceComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringEconomicsArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, reservoir management has been synonymous with the operation of engineering infrastructure systems, with the majority of literature on the topic focusing on strategies that optimize their operation and control. This is despite the fact that reservoirs have major impacts on society and the environment, and the mechanics of how to best manage a reservoir are often overshadowed by both environmental changes and higher-order questions associated with societal values, risk appetite and politics, which are highly uncertain and to which there are no “correct” answers. As a result, reservoirs have attracted more controversy than any other type of water infrastructure. In this paper, we address these often-ignored issues by providing a review of reservoir management through the lens of wickedness, competing objectives and uncertainty. We highlight the challenges associated with reservoir management and identify research efforts required to ensure these systems best serve society and the environment into the future.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.203 · 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