MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132437794

Evaluating carbon emissions in Arctic search and rescue operations

2025· article· en· W7132437794 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Max Kelly, Caleb Lethbridge, Joshua Veber, Thomas Browne, Brian Veitch

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArcticFishingSearch and rescueThe arcticGreenhouse gasConsumption (sociology)Climate change
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Davis Strait and Baffin Bay, in the Canadian eastern Arctic Ocean, fishing vessels are required to conduct search and rescue (SAR) operations in the event of a nearby emergency (Government of Canada, 2023). In this remote region, there are limited SAR capabilities. In performing these Vessel of Opportunity (VOO) operations, fishing vessels have increased fuel consumption and a loss of productivity, leading to added cost and carbon emissions. This is significant to fishery operators in the eastern Arctic Ocean. The goal of this research is to evaluate the dimension of carbon emissions relating to fishing vessels acting as VOOs in an emergency situation. This analysis is performed by use of a case study, focusing on the Canadian Arctic community of Qikiqtarjuaq. The consequences of a dedicated SAR base located within the community are analyzed, focusing on the impact it would have on carbon emissions during emergency situations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicArctic and Russian Policy Studies→French-language works237,207→