Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nonconventional fuels world is booming, headings in global media do not leave doubts about that.Uzbekistan plans a $600 mil shale processing plant, PetroChina and Hess Corp sign a shale development agreement to build an oil shale block in the Santanghu basin in Xinjiang region of China, San Leon acquires assets in Morocco's Timahdit oil shale deposit, Enefit Jordan granted a license to build a 500 MW oil shale power station -these are just a few examples of news articles of the last months.US and Canada's recent success in shale gas production has ignited, besides expansion of the world shale gas development, also a gold rush to explore and exploit known oil shale reserves.Boom is understood, the first claimers tend to take the cream -get the rights to develop the most oil-richest reserves and by this making sure that productions and profits will be the highest compared to latecomers'.At the same time, there are signals of setbacks in nonconventional fuels sector development due to difficulties in applying technologies proven in one area for other regions and types of shales, overestimation of the yields of reserves and, most of all, due to the strengthening of environmental regulations.Such regulations are mainly born from environmentalists and citizens' concerns over water contamination, biodiversity loss and adverse effects on climate due to the higher CO 2 footprint of the well-to-wheel cycle of nonconventional fuels compared to traditional oil.As Eesti Energia's CEO Sandor Liive, the runner of the oldest and most developed ex situ shale oil production technology Enefit, said at the International Oil Shale Symposium in Tallinn in June 2013: "Each oil shale is different and no one has yet succeeded in creating one technology that works perfectly with every oil shale.There is no off-the-shelf solution -we have enough experience to recognize that some steps in our process will need to be changed for other shale."The most recent signal of such a setback is withdrawal of the major player in the nonconventional fuels field, the Royal Dutch Shell, who announced that it would sell its 106,000-acre stake in the Eagle Ford shale formation in South Texas as reported by the Wall Street Journal in September this year.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.186 | 0.179 |
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".