A Framework to Measure the Cost of Controversy Surrounding Energy Construction Projects
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
Energy projects are essential to serving the world’s growing energy demands. However, energy construction projects encounter controversy when the community disagrees with the development process or expected project outcomes. These conflicts can and often do lead to schedule delays and cost overruns, yet energy project developers are rarely prepared to anticipate, mitigate, and respond to arising challenges. With this work, we aim to model the economic consequences of controversy stemming from public opposition to energy construction projects. We propose a framework to determine the potential costs and schedule delays occurring during a project’s timeline. We use a hybrid system dynamics and agent-based modeling approach demonstrated by wind energy construction projects. Developers can use the proposed methodology by inputting their project characteristics to anticipate controversy and mitigate risk through public outreach. The resulting model will serve as a proof of concept that can be expanded upon in future research.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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