MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206191070 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14100498

An Assessment of the Efficiency of Canadian Power Generation Companies with Bootstrap DEA

2021· article· en· W3206191070 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricity generationElectricityBenchmark (surveying)BusinessScale (ratio)Sample (material)Power (physics)Environmental economicsData envelopment analysisService (business)Electric power industryIndustrial organizationEconomicsMarketingStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power generation companies play an important role in the Canadian economy, as most of the economic activities in the manufacturing and service sectors are powered by electricity. The significance of the Canadian power generation industry shows that efficiency analysis is essential for efficiently managing power generation and distribution in Canada. However, there have been few attempts to study the relative efficiencies of the Canadian power generation companies. This study fills in this gap by assessing the overall technical, managerial, and scale efficiencies of a sample of Canadian power generation companies via the non-parametric bootstrap DEA methodology, with firm-level annual inputs and outputs data over an 18-year horizon. The results of our investigation indicate low levels of overall technical and managerial efficiencies but relatively high levels of scale efficiencies of the Canadian power generation companies over the entire study period. We also found that the 2007–2009 financial crisis impacted the relative performance of the Canadian power generation companies. Our results also allowed us to identify the benchmark power generation companies for each type of efficiency that the inefficient companies should target toward improving their efficiency.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.298 · 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