Community‐appropriate bioenergy resource potential assessment in Pelican Narrows, Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bioenergy is a promising renewable energy option for energy insecure communities across the boreal region. Whilst community energy planning tools are advancing, many are driven by external technical resource assessments and fail to capture local community values. Community energy solutions must be community‐appropriate. This research combines spatial tools with participatory mapping to assess bioenergy resource potential for the northern Indigenous community of Pelican Narrows, Saskatchewan. Results show that sufficient resources are available near the community to support local bioenergy production needs, whist respecting culturally significant and traditional use areas and ensuring that resources can be harvested within proximity of the community and road networks. The assessment approach demonstrates the utility of spatial and participatory tools to address the data challenges related to biomass resource assessment in remote northern contexts and to ensure community‐appropriate energy solutions. The research responds to increasing calls in energy geography scholarship for energy transition planning that is spatially relevant, grounded in technical realities, and accountable to community values, expectations, and aspirations .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".