Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the recent surge in fossil fuel prices, demands for cleaner energy sources, and government funding incentives, wind turbines have become a viable technology for power generation. In January 2006, Canada’s wind power capacity reached 682 MW [2], and it has been suggested that Canada has the wind resources capable of supplying 20% of Canada’s power requirements, translating to 50 000 MW of wind power capacity [2]. Northern Quebec alone has the wind resources to supply 40 % of Canada’s electricity requirements [2]. On a larger scale, the global wind power capacity at the end of 2004 was more than 47 000 MW, with Europe supplying 72 % of the total capacity [3]. Denmark is a world leader in wind energy production, having a capacity of 3542 MW, from both off and onshore turbines in January 2005 [4], which leads to 20 % of Denmark’s electricity being supplied by the wind [5]. These statistics suggest that Canada has the potential for a substantial increase in wind power capacity. In 2001, Natural Resources Canada introduced a wind power production incentive (WPPI) in an effort to increase Canada’s wind energy production. The WPPI
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".