MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W161283520 · doi:10.3133/fs20083014

Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the West Greenland-East Canada Province, 2008

2008· article· en· W161283520 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher J. Schenk, Kenneth J. Bird, Philip J. Brown, Ronald R. Charpentier, Donald L. Gautier, David W. Houseknecht, Timothy R. Klett, Mark J. Pawlewicz, Anjana K. Shah, Marilyn E. Tennyson

Bibliographic record

VenueFact sheet · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticGeologyBayOceanographySubmarine pipelineGeological surveyTectonicsStructural basinFossil fuelThe arcticResource (disambiguation)Physical geographyGeographyArchaeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) recently assessed the undiscovered oil and gas potential of the West Greenland-East Canada Province as part of the USGS Circum-Arctic Oil and Gas Resource Appraisal effort. The West Greenland-East Canada Province is essentially the offshore area between west Greenland and east Canada and includes Baffin Bay, Davis Strait, Lancaster Sound, and Nares Strait west of and including Kane Basin. The tectonic evolution of the West Greenland-East Canada Province led to the formation of several major structural domains that are the geologic basis for the five assessment units (AU) defined in this study. The five AUs encompass the entire province. Each AU was assessed in its entirety for undiscovered, technically recoverable (assuming absence of sea ice) oil and gas resources, but the assessment results reported here are only for those portions of each AU that are north of the Arctic Circle, as that latitude defines the area of the Circum-Arctic oil and gas assessment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFact sheetSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207