Non-technical risk of oil and gas cooperation in North America developed area——Analysis of Canada's North Gateway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-technical risk refers to other factors that may have major impact on project development besides oil and gas exploration and development technology, including environmental protection, land requisition and resettlement, and labor safety. It is divided into two aspects, i.e., legal, and social-political restraints, which run through the whole life cycle of project development. Businesses suffer from great losses because of non-technical risk, the biggest slice in the cause of project delay. The North Gateway is facing problems involving environment, community, political orientation, government approvals, etc. Improper communication with the indigenous people could be the main reason for project period delay, and another reason could be provincial income distribution. The debate of localization and project benefi t evaluation led to the lag for the government approval. To control nontechnical risk, oil companies in North America developed area should put emphasis on analysis of stakeholders and communication with them, deal with the problem of indigenous people, and conduct coordination and communication between the governments for cross-regional(cross-provincial) projects.
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".