A case of: who will tell the emperor he has no clothes?—market liberalization, regulatory capture and the need for further improved electricity market unbundling through a fourth energy package
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 25 February 2015, the European Commission published a Communication on its vision of an Energy Union as, amongst other things ‘an integrated continent wide energy system where energy flows freely across borders based on competition and the best possible use of resources and with effective regulation of energy markets at EU level where necessary’. The Communication listed the actions necessary to deliver this Energy Union in a list which was as interesting for what was not included as for what was. While full implementation and enforcement of existing energy and related law (and particularly the third energy package) was listed as the first priority of the Union, there was no mention of the need for further market unbundling or a fourth energy package. This position is worrying. Through an inadequate implementation of poorly designed market structures, the EU has created national markets which are hotbeds for consumer-damaging market manipulation and abuse. Consequently, there is a pressing need for further market unbundling and a fourth energy package. Not only will such measures be essential to the successful creation of an Energy Union and the realization of the benefits expected from market liberalization, they are urgently needed to remove existing market structures, which are facilitating consumer-damaging anticompetitive behaviours by making such behaviours virtually impossible to detect and punish.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.027 | 0.033 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".