MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405253230 · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112835

Decoding methane concentration in Alberta oil sands: A machine learning exploration

2024· article· en· W4405253230 on OpenAlex
Liubov Sysoeva, Ilhem Bouderbala, Esha Saha, B. A. Zambrano-Luna, Russell Milne, Hao Wang

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Indicators · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOil sandsDecoding methodsMethaneEnvironmental scienceGeologyComputer scienceArchaeologyEcologyGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most activities associated with Alberta’s oil sands industry are widely recognized as a serious threat to the environment, particularly the emission of greenhouse gases; the industrial residue that accumulates in oil sands tailings ponds (OSTPs) has the potential to emit large quantities of methane. Mathematical modeling of these emissions, and hence deducing where and why high methane concentrations can be found, is often infeasible due to complex interactions between different sources of methane and lack of availability of appropriate data. Additionally, stationing advanced monitoring devices either inside or in the vicinity of methane emitting sources can be expensive, and may require permits that are hard to obtain. Interpretable machine learning techniques, coupled with existing data from weather monitoring stations, offer a cost-effective alternative approach for modeling and understanding methane emissions sources. We introduce a multi-step framework for finding the primary factors associated with higher methane concentrations, powered by machine learning models (such as random forest) trained on high dimensional datasets sourced from multiple weather monitoring stations located in the Lower Athabasca region. The proposed framework can predict methane concentration levels, illustrate the dependence between the important features and their impact on these levels, and (via the incorporation of wind data) uncover locations of methane sources. We use it to locate such sources in northeastern Alberta. We additionally use Shapley values to find that O 3 ’s relationship with methane concentration is consistently concave, while that of NO X changes from linear increase to a saturation function with increasing distance from OSTPs. This paper serves as a guide for building machine learning-driven models to estimate methane concentration in Alberta’s oil sands, or similar regions with methane-producing extractive industries. • We use interpretable machine learning to explain methane levels in northeast Alberta. • The relationship between NO X and methane changed with distance to tailings ponds. • Using our method with wind direction data revealed methane source locations. • Methane concentrations were higher in winter due to both natural and human factors. • Oil sands sources were associated with higher methane contribution than swamplands.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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