MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088109569 · doi:10.3390/en20200269

North American Natural Gas Supply Forecast: The Hubbert Method Including the Effects of Institutions

2009· article· en· W2088109569 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas B. Reynolds, Marek Kolodziej

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasNatural resource economicsUnconventional oilSupply and demandNatural gas industryEconomicsInflection pointPetroleum engineeringFossil fuelOil shaleEnvironmental scienceEngineeringWaste managementMicroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the U.S. and southern Canadian natural gas supply market is considered. An important model for oil and natural gas supply is the Hubbert curve. Not all regions of the world are producing oil or natural gas following a Hubbert curve, even when price and market conditions are accounted for. One reason is that institutions are affecting supply. We investigate the possible effects of oil and gas market institutions in North America on natural gas supply. A multi-cycle Hubbert curve with inflection points similar to the Soviet Union’s oil production multi-cycle Hubbert curve is used to determine North American natural gas discovery rates and to analyze how market specific institutions caused the inflection points. In addition, we analyze the latest shale natural gas projections critically. While currently, unconventional resources of natural gas suggest that North American natural gas production will increase without bound, the model here suggests a peak in North American natural gas supplies could happen in 2013.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207