Fonti Engergetiche Transfrontaliere E Diritto Ambientale, Politica E Politiche: Il Caso Del Gasdotto Keystone Pipeline in Canada E Negli Stati Uniti (Transboundary Environmental Energy and Environmental Law, Policy and Politics: The Keystone Pipeline Case in Canada and the United States)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Italian Abstract:Fonti energetiche transfrontaliere e diritto ambientale, politica e politiche: il caso del gasdotto Keystone Pipeline in Canada e negli Stati Uniti (*)Una delle decisioni piu difficili per il secondo mandato dell'amministrazione Obama e in materia di tutela ambientale e riguarda la Keystone Pipeline XL.Antefatto.La Pipeline XL e un tratto del grande progetto multi-fase che ha come obiettivo quello di trasportare alle raffinerie negli Stati Uniti il greggio ricavato dalle sabbie bituminose dell'Alberta. Le prime tre fasi sono sia gia operative con il greggio che viene recapitato ai mercati Mid-West, che ancora in costruzione. E la quarta fase quella che impegna il Congresso nel momento in cui questo articolo e stato scritto.1. Antefatto. —2. Chi decide e perche. —3. lmplicazioni per l'ambiente e per Ia politica ambientale durante il secondo mandato di Obama. —4. Altre possibili azioni legali. -5. Conclusioni.English AbstractThe Keystone XL pipeline refers to one segment of a multi stage set of projects which is aimed at bringing oil sands bitumen from the sand tars area of Alberto, Canada to refineries in the United States. The first three phases of the project are either operational or under construction and crude oil is being delivered to Mid-West markets. It is the fourth that confronts Canadian and United States officials as this article is being written. In this brief summary I describe the background of the controversy and the decision making framework and outline possible legal actions that may be taken whatever the decision of the Obama and relevant Canadian administrations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".