MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7105879281 · doi:10.5683/sp3/pgjx03

Replication Data for: Canada's Landfill Methane Inventories: The Challenge of Accurate Modeled and Measurement-Based Emissions

2025· dataset· W7105879281 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2025
Typedataset
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTonneMethanePrecipitationMethane emissionsMetric (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset provides information about 42 anonymized Canadian landfills. We conducted mobile methane measurements at these landfills in 2022. The dataset includes parameters from independant FOD modeling and the resulting emission rates, the estimated emission rates from the mobile surveys, and information about the climate and province. lfid, anonymized landfill ID province, location of the landfill status, open or closed yr_precip, total annual precipitation (2018-2022) in mm temperature, average temperation (2018-2022) in degC climate_cluster, climate category used in the paper, based on precipitation and temerature waste_accumulated_2022, in tonne waste_accumulated_2021, in tonnes Lo_IPCC_accumulated_2022, potential methane that could be generated, in tonnes methane_generated_2022, in tonnes methane_flared_2022, as reported by operators, in tonnes methane_utilized_2022, as repoerted by operators, in tonnes ECCC_2022_rate, estimated FOD based rate in 2022 ECCC_2021_rate, estimated FOD based rate in 2021, truck_GPM_rate, estimate measurement-based emission rate in 2022 truck_GPM_rate_bias_corrected, bias-corrected measurement-based emission rate in 2022 GHGRP_2022, emission rate in 2022 as reported by the operators

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.012

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→