MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of Canadian Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling: Lessons from the Gulf of Mexico

2011· article· en· W1495219435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Will Amos

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Community & International Environmental Law · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore drillingSubmarine pipelineArcticJurisdictionThe arcticOffshore oil and gasDrillingOil explorationEnvironmental scienceOil drillingEnvironmental protectionFossil fuelEnvironmental planningBusinessEnvironmental resource managementOceanographyPetroleum engineeringEngineeringGeologyLawPolitical scienceWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada's National Energy Board has undertaken a review of general safety and environmental protection requirements for Arctic offshore drilling within the country's jurisdiction. The review is focusing, among other things, on the requirement for same season relief well (SSRW) capacity for Arctic offshore operators, and whether proposed alternatives are sufficiently robust to allow removal of the SSRW requirement. Given the significant threat offshore drilling poses to the fragile Arctic ecosystem, safety requirements must be strengthened, not weakened. The SSRW capability requirement should be maintained, and other policies, regulations and requirements ought to be strengthened and improved.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
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

Citations29
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European Community & International Environmental LawSame topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207