Recent trends in Cuba’s mining and petroleum industries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First posted March 31, 2015 Revised March 15, 2018 For additional information, contact: Director, National Minerals Information Center U.S. Geological Survey 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive 988 National Center Reston, VA 20192 Email: nmicrecordsmgt@usgs.gov In response to recent diplomatic developments between Cuba and the United States, the National Minerals Information Center compiled available information on the mineral industries of Cuba. This fact sheet highlights a new map and table that identify mines, mineral processing facilities, and petroleum facilities as well as information on location, operational status, and ownership. It also addresses the current status of known mineral industry projects, historical developments, and trends of the Cuban economy with an emphasis on mineral industries, and the supply and demand for Cuba’s mineral resources.In 2013, Cuba was estimated to be among the world’s top ten producers of cobalt and nickel, which are the country’s leading exports. Cuba’s current crude oil and associated natural gas production from onshore and shallow water coastal reservoirs is approximately 50,000 barrels per day of liquids and about 20,000 barrels per day oil equivalent of natural gas. In 2013, the value of mining and quarrying activities accounted for 0.6 percent of Cuba’s gross domestic product (GDP), compared with 1.4 percent in 2000. The value of production from Cuba’s industrial manufacturing sector increased by 88 percent between 1993 and 2013, whereas the sector’s share in the GDP decreased by about 3 percent during the same time period reflecting economic growth in other sectors of the economy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".