MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941617776 · doi:10.1021/cen-09716-buscon6

Methanex, M&G make up

2019· article· en· W2941617776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alex Tullo

Bibliographic record

VenueC&EN Global Enterprise · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methanex has signed an agreement with its largest shareholder, M&G Investments, that gives M&G two slots on the methanol maker’s board. M&G, which owns 16.5% of Methanex’s stock and has been a shareholder since 2007, had been seeking a proxy showdown with Methanex to put four new directors on its board. The investment fund objects to Methanex’s plan to build a new methanol plant at its Geismar, Louisiana, complex, fearing it will be too risky. As part of the agreement, an independent advisory firm will review the project. Also, one of M&G’s nominees, Canadian electricity executive Paul Dobson, will get a seat on Methanex’s board. Another new director will be appointed after Methanex’s annual meeting later this month. The companies will also abide by a standstill agreement, which means no fighting, until after the 2020 annual meeting. Ashland recently struck a similar standstill agreement with an investor, Cruiser Capital Advisors,

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.011

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.261 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueC&EN Global EnterpriseSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207