MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7094063655

Natural Gas

2017· article· W7094063655 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University) · 2017
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasCoalFuel gasFossil fuelEnergy sourceSubstitute natural gasUSableProducer gas
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the world of fossil fuels, natural gas is often the overlooked ugly duckling. It gets lumped in with oil, as in “oil and gas industry”, even though the discussion usually centers upon oil. It does not help that gasoline, which is derived from oil, is shortened to “gas”. In many people’s mind, the “gas” in “oil and gas” refers to gasoline, and not natural gas. However, natural gas has much to offer as an energy source that makes it preferable to other forms of fossil fuels. It burns much cleaner than coal or oil, and it produces far less carbon dioxide for each unit of energy. Its simple chemical nature makes it a much better source to use in high efficiency fuel cells than either coal or gas. As a usable energy source, natural gas really has only one stumbling block, but it is a major one: it is hard to transport and store. If the transport or storage system is not completely sealed, natural gas will leak. Further, both systems must be able to withstand high pressures in order to compact the natural gas into a reasonable space. These problems have kept natural gas from widespread usage throughout history, even though its existence has been known about for a long time. Like coal and oil, natural gas has been used for several millennia. The earliest records of this date back to 200 B.C., when the Chinese developed a crude system of bamboo pipes to transport gas to burners to evaporate brine to make salt. However, it was not until large-scale pipe systems were developed in the 1800’s that natural gas began to see extended use. Initially, it was used for lighting in homes and buildings. The increased production of electricity in the late 1800’s led to a decline in this usage, although there became a growing demand throughout the 1900’s for its use to heat homes, water, and cook. Most of this usage of natural gas was near the wells that produced it due to the lack of long-range pipelines or transport. In 1925, the first all-welded pipeline over 200 miles in length was built, running from Louisiana to Texas. The growth in such pipeline networks and the cheap price of natural gas led to an expansion in its use. Between the turn of the century and 1970, usage and production of natural gas increased fifty-fold. However, production of natural gas in the U.S. peaked in 1973, and by 1980, we began to import natural gas from other countries. Today, about 15 percent of our natural gas comes from other countries, mostly through pipelines from Canada.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1200.080

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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University)Same topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207