MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164092138 · doi:10.5539/mas.v15n3p71

Economic Evaluation of “Green Energy” Potential in Nagorno-Karabakh and Neighboring Regions

2021· article· en· W3164092138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nargiz Hajiyeva, Ali Karimli

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyNatural resource economicsSustainabilityEnergy securityElectricityNatural resourceHarmony (color)BusinessEnvironmental protectionEconomicsEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper focuses on the economic opportunities of renewable energy resources (RES) in Azerbaijan's liberated territories. Armenia illegally exploited energy and other natural resources in Nagorno-Karabakh and its surrounding areas during its 30-year occupation. As a result, it is not surprising that the establishment of a "green energy" zone in the territories has been given high priority in the post-liberation period. Traditional energy sources are currently the most common source of electricity generation in the world. In this regard, the world's ever-increasing energy demand accelerates nation-states' gradual transition to green energy. Electricity generation from renewable energy sources is increasing in many countries, including the United States. In Nagorno-Karabakh and seven neighboring regions, the state is focusing on the production and effective use of renewable energy resources. As a result, ensuring harmony in the gradual use of renewable and traditional energy resources will be essential to the country's socioeconomic development, environmental sustainability, and energy security. The economic analysis of renewable energy potential and the establishment of a “green energy” industry are conducted in the article.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207