MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083866959

Report: Lake oil spill in Michigan would cost nearly $2B

2018· other· en· W7083866959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Archive (Internet Archive) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicStress and Burnout Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil spillPipeline (software)Pipeline transportShut downCost estimateCrude oilTourismHydrology (agriculture)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experts predict that a worst-case scenario leak of an old oil pipeline where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet would cost nearly $2 billion. A worst-case scenario leak of an old oil pipeline where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet would cost nearly $2 billion.Michigan released a draft of a report by an independent team of scientists who estimate that more than half the cost would be cleanup.Much of the rest would be lost tourism income.The scientists were looking at the potential impact of a spill from Canadian company Enbridge's Line 5, which runs beneath the Straits of Mackinac.Critics say the 65-year-old line is vulnerable to leaks and should be shut down.Enbridge says the pipeline is in good shape and that the report's scenarios are purely hypothetical.""

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1470.023

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.296 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet Archive (Internet Archive)Same topicStress and Burnout ResearchFrench-language works237,207