Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Keystone Pipeline and everything it entails has taken over the news and the majority of North America. Most people around the United States did not know the Keystone Pipeline already existed before all of the uproar and protesting began back at the end of 2011. The part of the pipeline that does not exist is the additional expansion, the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was proposed in 2008. Since the approval of the project in March 2010, the Keystone XL Pipeline has been a problematic proposition ever since the idea was introduced by the TransCanada Energy Company. While the project was originally developed as a partnership between TransCanada and ConocoPhillips, TransCanada is now the sole owner of the Keystone Pipeline System, as TransCanada received regulatory approval on August 12, 2009 to purchase ConocoPhillips' interest. TransCanada attempted to get a permit for the new pipeline for more than three years. Since the pipeline crosses international borders, TransCanada had to obtain a Presidential Permit through the State Department for construction of the portion of the pipeline that goes from Canada to the U.S. To this day, even though a substantial amount of the project is complete, protesters are still against the idea of transporting tar sands throughout Canada and the United States to refineries in Houston, Texas so that we will have additional sources of oil and fuel to supply our needs. The paper discusses the controversy, the accounting implications, the legal implications, and local press. Pictures Included.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.576 | 0.207 |
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".