MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1618684619

Canadian Oil Sands Investments: FOCUS on a Controversial Energy Source

2009· preprint· en· W1618684619 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ennio A. Palombizio, Jan Moritz Borchert

Bibliographic record

VenueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich) · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsExternalityInvestment (military)Natural resource economicsEconomicsEconomyEnergy demandFossil fuelOil priceFocus (optics)Environmental policyOil reservesBusinessPetroleumEngineeringPolitical scienceGeographyMicroeconomicsMonetary economicsWaste managementGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rising energy demand and prices, particularly for oil, has led to a search for solutions to quell this increase. With the advent of the Oil Sands, we have stumbled upon an opportunity to increase Oil supplies and thus stabilize prices and satisfy demand. A large portion of the oil sands are located in Canada and this gives Canada an opportunity to improve its economy.\nSince the discovery, Canada has seen a vast influx in investment for the purpose of extracting these oil deposits. Using the University of Toronto's FOCUS model, which simulates the Canadian economy, this paper simulates and forecasts current and future trends in the Canadian economy that arise from this increase in investment.\nThis paper breaks down the impacts on the various aspects of the Canadian economy and also analyzes many social issues that arise from the expansion of the oil sands, particularly the environmental issues. By doing so, one can analyze the current policies in place to deal with this expansion and revise them or create new policy which can prove more efficient in dealing with a potentially bubbling economy and the externalities that come from it.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich)→Same topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research→French-language works237,207→