MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560500824 · doi:10.29173/alr472

Sole Risk Provisions in Joint Operating Agreements for Unconventional Oil and Gas Development

2016· article· en· W2560500824 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Rob Desbarats, Jay Todesco, Kate Royer

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Offshore Engineering Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Resource (disambiguation)PetroleumJoint (building)Energy lawUnconventional oilBusinessFossil fuelEconomicsRisk analysis (engineering)Industrial organizationOperations researchEnvironmental economicsComputer sciencePolitical scienceLawEngineeringEnvironmental lawChemistryCivil engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses independent operations in the context of unconventional oil and gas resources. It considers how the Canadian Association of Petroleum Landmen (CAPL) and the Association of International Petroleum Negotiators (AIPN) have reacted to this. It provides a detailed analysis of the differences between the 2015 CAPL Operating Procedures and the 2014 AIPN Unconventional Resources Operating Agreement. Particular focus is given to permissible independent operations under each agreement, the timing of those independent operations, and the penalties given to a non-participating party. The article concludes by discussing the importance of drafting customized sole risk provisions in some situations, given that unconventional resource development often varies from project to project.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicMarine and Offshore Engineering StudiesFrench-language works237,207