Market Segmentation and Pricing Strategies in the North American Natural Gas Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper analyzes the marketing strategies followed by Canadian companies operating in the North American natural gas markets. It focuses on two elements of the marketing mix: (a) market segmentation and (b) pricing. The highly competitive natural gas markets of North America, strengthened by the deregulation process, the restructuring of electric utility industries, the advance in technological communications, and the global growing concerns on environmental issues, make market segmentation and pricing key elements in setting marketing strategies. The main findings of this research are: (a) the market segmentation is highly dependent on the availability of pipeline distribution and cost of transportation of gas; (b) decisions on market segmentation regarding types of customers are highly dependent on the highest netback that can be obtained; (c) pricing in the natural gas market of North America is highly affected by the availability of distribution pipelines, cost of transportation, period of contract with buyer companies and by the use of alternative energy sources by end-users; and (d) there is a direct relationship between geographical market segmentation and pricing. The factor that links these two variables is the availability of pipelines to move the gas to the markets.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".