Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on his May 2010 Edwin L. Godkin Lecture at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, John M. Deutch's new book draws on his decades of experience in public, private, and academic circles to present a thoughtful rumination on the past, present, and future of a national energy policy. The energy challenge is multifaceted and daunting: “how best to satisfy reasonable energy demand with secure, affordable sources of supply, without unduly harming the environment” (p. 1). Several energy crises since the oil shocks of the 1970s spurred progress on a series of secondary issues—including price deregulation, air quality, and energy productivity—but the United States has failed to address the major issues. The first four chapters of The Crisis in Energy Policy examine such aspects of the energy challenge as the policy-making process, climate change, energy security, the chimera of “energy independence,” and managing the transition to a post–fossil fuel economy. A fifth chapter addresses what Deutch sees as a fundamentally flawed conception of the federal government's role in fostering technological innovation, and the final chapter presents a five-point plan for reforming the policy-making process. Deutch's recommendations—the integration of foreign and domestic energy policy; the establishment of a joint energy and environmental committee in Congress; congressional approval of a five-year energy and environment plan; and the strengthening of the federal government's attempts to encourage energy innovation—are bound to incite heated debate as they envision a greater role for the federal government, and the executive branch in particular, in future energy policies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".