MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Resource Whose Time Has Come? The Alberta Oil Sands as an Economic Resource

2008· article· en· W2140963248 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Energy Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsResource (disambiguation)Oil reservesNatural resourceNatural resource economicsFoundation (evidence)Order (exchange)BusinessEnvironmental resource managementPetroleumEconomicsGeographyGeologyPolitical scienceArchaeologyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alberta oil sands, which comprise over 170 billion barrels of proven recoverable reserves, are a resource of an order of magnitude similar to many estimates of ultimate world conventional oil reserves. Campbell Watkins maintained a long-standing emphasis on the essential economic component of any meaningful definition of the world’s natural resources. The fact is that the Alberta oil sands have had a very shaky economic foundation until only recently. The intention of this paper is to examine this emerging resource from an economic perspective; one, it is hoped, similar to that which Watkins evinced, in order to fully assess the extent to which the Alberta oil sands may be regarded as being no different in any meaningful way from other oil resources.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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