MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903452604 · doi:10.5334/kula.21

Regulation Requires Records: Access to Fracking Information in the Marcellus/Utica Shale Formations

2018· article· en· W2903452604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eira Tansey

Bibliographic record

VenueKULA knowledge creation dissemination and preservation studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic fracturingContext (archaeology)Oil shaleBusinessFossil fuelEnvironmental planningPetroleum industryDownstream (manufacturing)EngineeringNatural resource economicsPetroleum engineeringWaste managementEnvironmental scienceGeographyOperations managementEnvironmental engineeringEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the world of environmental regulation, records are the foundation on which all further regulatory action takes place. From permits that give industry permission to pollute in the name of economic activity, to annual production reports documenting how much fossil fuel is taken out of the ground, notices of violation issued by regulators, to complaints filed by citizens noticing contaminants in their water supply, recordkeeping is fundamental to regulation. Even as records are critical to understanding and contextualizing environmental problems, accessing and interpreting this information is an exceptionally difficult experience. This article will consider the regulatory recordkeeping context of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, the three most productive states in the Marcellus/Utica shale formation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKULA knowledge creation dissemination and preservation studiesSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207