MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2268519303 · doi:10.14288/1.0106159

Fuel balance and atomic energy in the USSR

2012· article· en· W2268519303 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

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy balanceAtomic energyBalance (ability)Environmental sciencePolitical sciencePhysicsAgency (philosophy)EpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The topic for this study in its present form was suggested to the writer by Dr. Hans Ernest Ronimois, who felt that the problems concerning fuel balance in the USSR are of particular interest at the present time, when the priority allocation pattern is being reorganized to give greater prominence to oil and gas and when a new form of energy, derived from nuclear reactions, is being introduced parallel with the old forms. In a free market economy the extent to which various types of fuel are used in a given area at any particular time is determined by the demand for them. In the Soviet Union, on the other hand, it is arbitrarily decided by the planners. In part one the study deals with the priority allocation in the fuel economy of the Soviet Union during the period of War Communism, NEP, and the successive Five Year Plans. Special consideration is given to the recent shift in priority allocation from coal to oil and gas and to the reasons which led to this shift. Part two is devoted to considerations of atomic energy. The first chapter is an assessment of the resources of conventional fuels in the U.S.A., U.K. and Canada and the atomic programs undertaken in these countries. The rest of part two is devoted to the subject of nuclear research facilities, reactor development program and atomic energy power stations in the USSR. In the course of the study are exposed the economically disruptive effects arising from the arbitrary allocation of priorities within the Soviet fuel and power economy. Some of these have been brought to light by Soviet economists through the recent preparation of the unified fuel and power balance in the USSR. The priority mix decided upon on the basis of a formally prepared fuel balance is a static form, incapable of self adjustment in consequence of current technological developments during the plan or in response to changes in demand. Consequently it cannot have the regulating properties of "value" in the free market economy. The absence of a "dynamic regulating criterion" in a planned economy is concluded to be a grave handicap which is bound to continue to have a dislocating effect on the development of fuel and power resources of the Soviet Union. Without the criterion of "value" to regulate economic activity arbitrary decisions by the planners will continue to be necessary for the working of the economy and so, even with the unified fuel and power balance, the likelihood of misallocations, similar to those which occurred in the past is not eliminated, though their presence will probably be discovered earlier. With regard to the introduction of atomic energy, it is felt that the Soviet Union is not as yet ready to consider it to the same degree as is being done in the U.S.A. and Canada, and this in spite of the fact that greater opportunities for the use of atomic power appear to exist in the USSR. The reason for this tardiness is thought to be shortage of nuclear fuels in the USSR also, probably, insufficient mastery of fuel utilization in the reactors.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.150 · 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