MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609583105 · doi:10.29173/alr509

World Petroleum Legislation: Frameworks That Foster Oil and Gas Development

2001· article· en· W2609583105 on OpenAlexaffvenue
William T. Onorato, J. Jay Park

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsExxonMobil (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLegislaturePetroleumGovernment (linguistics)EndowmentInvestment (military)Petroleum explorationElement (criminal law)BusinessPetroleum industryIndustrial organizationFossil fuelEconomicsInternational tradeLaw and economicsLawPolitical scienceEngineeringPoliticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article the authors draw upon the experience of the World Bank in encouraging petroleum investment in its member countries to analyze the essential elements of international-standard legislative frameworks for petroleum exploration and production operations. The basic components of Petroleum Law, Regulations, and Model Contracts are examined with a view to explaining the principles and rationale for each essential element of successful legislative frameworks while recognizing that there is room for a myriad of variations and innovation depending on the hydrocarbon endowment, real or perceived, of each host government.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicNatural Resources and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207