MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172606112 · doi:10.1525/tph.2015.37.2.144

Book Review: American Energy, Imperiled Coast: Oil and Gas Development in Louisiana’s Wetlands

2015· article· en· W2172606112 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

VenueThe Public Historian · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconDownloadCitationIndex (typography)Library scienceWetlandCorporationSocial mediaSearch engine optimizationHistoryEngineeringWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical scienceSearch engineLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| May 01 2015 Book Review: American Energy, Imperiled Coast: Oil and Gas Development in Louisiana’s Wetlands American Energy, Imperiled Coast: Oil and Gas Development in Louisiana’s Wetlands by Jason P. Theriot. : Louisiana State University Press, 2014. vii + 271 pp.; illustrations, notes, selected bibliography, index; clothbound, $38.00. Anna Adamek Anna Adamek Canada Science and Technology Museums Corporation Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2015) 37 (2): 144–146. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2015.37.2.144 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Anna Adamek; Book Review: American Energy, Imperiled Coast: Oil and Gas Development in Louisiana’s Wetlands. The Public Historian 1 May 2015; 37 (2): 144–146. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2015.37.2.144 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The Regents of the University of California and the National Council on Public History2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.187 · 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