MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2279721575

Energy Security and the Revival of Geopolitics

2012· article· en· W2279721575 on OpenAlexaff
Mikhail A. Molchanov

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsEnergy securityRealmGlobalizationPolitical scienceState (computer science)Political economyEconomyEnergy policyNatural resourceEconomic systemEconomicsPoliticsLawEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of energy security is being reviewed from a standpoint of geopolitics. The contention is that geopolitics is inescapably related to the question of energy security for a simple reason: the contradiction between the universal character of energy demand and the nation-state’s exclusive right of management of natural resources located within its realm. I start with a discussion of the earlier historical antecedents of geopolitics of natural resources and the imperialist struggle for oil at the beginning of the twentieth century. I follow with an overview of the oil crises of the seventies, which ended the era of the oligopolistic domination of the market by a few western companies, and instituted the second oil regime, much more dependent on stability of the producing countries. The discussion then moves to the impact of globalization and the return of geopolitics that followed mass disillusionment with the neoliberal project of the nineties. The article ends with a case study that focuses on present struggles over the control of energy resources in Eurasia. As Russia reasserts controls over its energy production and trade, its energy policies and foreign economic relations take center stage in the discussions of energy security in both regional and global contexts.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207