MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Electricity Restructuring In Ontario

2005· article· en· W2088978656 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael J. Trebilcock, Roy Hrab

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Energy Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringCompetition (biology)ElectricityGovernment (linguistics)Electricity marketOrder (exchange)Consumption (sociology)Electricity retailingPoliticsBusinessMarket economyEconomicsEconomyFinancePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the short-lived electricity sector restructuring initiative of the province of Ontario, Canada’s largest province. In May 2002, following years of planning and consultation Ontario opened its retail and wholesale electricity markets to competition. The summer of 2002 saw retail prices reach levels that consumers had never previously encountered. By December 2002, the provincial government froze retail electricity prices, covering approximately half of Ontario’s electricity consumption. While the weather played a significant role in driving prices higher during the summer of 2002, other factors also played a major role. The other factors reviewed in this paper fall into two categories. The first category consists of market design problems, such as market rules (e.g., trading arrangements) and market structure (e.g., the degree of competition in the generation sector). The second category covers political economy problems, in particular the lack of political will to allow retail prices to reflect wholesale prices and to address effectively structural problems in the sector. Finally, this paper examines some of the new restructuring initiatives being pursued by the recently elected provincial government of Ontario as the province continues to struggle to bring order to its electricity sector.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations38
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Energy JournalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207