MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104938392 · doi:10.3905/jsf.2000.320213

The Development of the Merchant Power Market in Alberta

2000· article· en· W2104938392 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of structured finance · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeregulationBusinessWeb syndicationHydroelectricityPower marketMarket powerPower (physics)Government (linguistics)FinanceMarket economyEconomicsMonopolyEngineeringElectric power system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first cracks in the traditional monopolies held by Canadian provincial-government-owned hydroelectric companies and large integrated utilities are beginning to emerge. Among the provinces, Alberta is leading the charge towards deregulation of the Canadian power market. In December 1999, the first non-recourse merchant-power project financing to emerge from Canada hit the syndication market. The 416 MW Joffre Cogeneration Plant in the Province Alberta is a model for future merchant power financings in Alberta and across Canada. Despite the significant progress made in deregulation of the Alberta market, the creation of a broad merchant-power market in Canada is still years away. The force that may eventually drive Canada to merchant power is the increased interconnection with the U.S. and greater participation by Canadian utilities in the developing merchant markets to the south.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.170 · 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