Risks, Rewards and Regulation of Unconventional Gas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global energy transition from carbon-intensive to renewable fuels has increasingly demanded a better understanding of the causes and consequences of the rapid development of unconventional oil and gas. Focusing on key countries including the United States, Canada, China, Argentina, the United Kingdom and Australia, this book consists of case studies and in-depth analyses that weigh up the risks and rewards at regional, national and global scales. Explaining how and why unconventional fuels are transforming the global energy landscape, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats are explored through a political, economic and governance-based perspective. Emphasis is placed on how to regulate the industry, encompassing local issues, stakeholder engagement and the social licence to operate. The new baseline studies and standards introduced in this book provide a timely insight into the trade-offs across the social, economic and environmental domains, making this ideal for researchers and policymakers in energy fields, and for graduate students.
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.
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 it