MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058255403 · doi:10.1190/1.1438884

The future of natural gas exploration in the Foothills of the Western Canadian Rocky Mountains

2001· article· en· W2058255403 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew C. Newson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsAlberta Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoothillsNatural (archaeology)GeographyGeologyPhysical geographyArchaeologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Foothills of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB) cover 40 000 miles2 in the fold and thrust belt of the Canadian Rocky Mountains. The topmost northwestern point lies just north of the Northwest Territories border at the town of Fort Liard. The Foothills also occupy part of the adjacent Yukon Territory, run southeast through British Columbia and Alberta, and terminate near the U.S./Canadian border (Figure 1). The northwestern and southeastern limits are controlled by political boundaries and the extent of the natural gas gathering system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207