Research on the Measurement of the Technical Innovative Capabilities of Oil and Gas Industry Clusters and Their Factors of Influence: Empirical Analysis Based on Eight Provinces in China
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
Existing studies have suggested that rich mineral resources may serve as a “resource curse” as well as a “resource blessing” with respect to regional economic development. However, the reason behind the emergence of this paradox is not clear. In this paper, we carried out an investigation of the sustainable development of oil and gas industry clusters in eight provinces of China. We studied the panel data of these industry clusters and performed quantitative analysis. By considering the effects of the technical innovation ability of the cluster on its long-term development, we showed that increasing the technical innovation ability of the cluster promoted the development of the industry, which led to a “resource blessing” situation. On the other hand, a mineral resource-based industry cluster may not survive long without technological innovation. Increasing investments in scientific research and technology development and reducing the reckless expansion of the industry cluster may lower the possibility of the occurrence of a “resource curse”.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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