MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257545106 · doi:10.1111/opec.12089

Shale oil boom and the profitability of US petroleum refiners

2016· article· en· W2257545106 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOPEC Energy Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexOil shaleBoomCrack spreadRefineryShale oilOil refineryPetroleumProduction (economics)EconomicsCrude oilPetroleum productShale oil extractionDomestic marketOil-storage tradeAgricultural economicsMonetary economicsPulp and paper industryEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringOil priceWaste managementFinanceMacroeconomicsChemistryEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article provides a quantitative analysis of how the recent boom in US oil production—largely a result of shale oil production—has impacted the domestic petroleum refining industry. We quantify how domestic crude prices are related to refiners’ financial performance. The estimates suggest that since 2011 independent refiners’ profitability rose by 3 per cent for a domestic crude oil price decrease of 1 per cent, while they were not associated with domestic crude prices before 2011. The relation between refinery profitability and domestic oil prices is consistent with the results of pass‐through of relative domestic crude prices to relative refined product prices in the United States before and since the dramatic rise in shale oil production.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.192 · 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