MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072802370 · doi:10.2118/168352-ms

Making the Connection: Oil and Gas Management of Natural Resources

2014· article· en· W2072802370 on OpenAlexaff
Paola Maria Pedroni, Karl Fennessey, Ruth Romer, Philip Ruck

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum industryBusinessEnvironmental resource managementNatural resourceStakeholderEcosystem servicesUpstream (networking)Fossil fuelBiodiversityWater resourcesProcess managementEnvironmental planningEcosystemEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringTelecommunicationsEcologyEnvironmental engineeringEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract IPIECA, the global oil and gas industry association for environmental and social issues, develops shares and promotes good practice and knowledge to help the industry improve its environmental and social performance. Through its member led working groups and executive leadership, IPIECA brings together the collective expertise of oil and gas companies and associations on a number of issues relevant to onshore and offshore operations. Two specific areas of focus for IPIECA are the topics of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (BES) and Water Management. In recognition of the cross-cutting nature of these two topics, and to coincide with the UN International Day for Biodiversity’s 2013 theme of "Water and Biodiversity", IPIECA developed a communications tool - Making the connection: oil and gas management of natural resources. The interactive illustration highlights the interface between the management of BES and water issues throughout upstream onshore oil and gas operations. This tool outlines the key management steps for identifying and assessing both dependencies and potential impacts of operations on BES and water risks, as well as how to implement these practically. The purpose is: To highlight the relevance and importance of ecosystem services for oil and gas operations;To illustrate the synergies and alignment in the approach and management steps for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (BES) and water throughout the operational lifecycle;To present the range of practices and tools available to implement the management steps. The management steps are based on the "Plan, Do, Check, Act" cycle for continuous improvement in the management of natural resources. Stakeholder engagement is fully integrated into the process. HSE professionals, managers and practitioners can click through each stage of the cycle to understand the IPIECA approach whilst also discovering IPIECA tools and products that are available to help manage BES and water issues effectively. This paper provides more detail on the rationale behind the different components of the management cycle and uses examples to illustrate its practical application.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.005

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and EnvironmentSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207