MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292478934 · doi:10.1111/nrm.12354

Polluting resource extraction and climate risk

2022· article· en· W4292478934 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Resource Modeling · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsCenter for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on OrganizationsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShadow priceNatural resource economicsEconomicsScarcityCarbon sequestrationCarbon taxNatural resourceClimate changeExtraction (chemistry)Greenhouse gasAtmosphere (unit)Fossil fuelTerm (time)Shadow (psychology)Resource (disambiguation)Environmental scienceEconometricsMicroeconomicsEcologyCarbon dioxideBiologyMeteorologyMathematical optimizationComputer scienceChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using a fossil fuel extraction model that treats the atmosphere as a depletable resource, we study the optimal price of carbon in the presence of endogenous uncertainty around a climatic regime shift. We find that the optimal carbon tax should account an uncertainty‐adjusted cost term associated with the environment's scarcity. This term is shown to be sensitive to the natural sequestration rate of the atmosphere and to the probability surrounding a climate tail event. Our analysis also shows that in the presence of uncertainty, the shadow price of the environment should grow at a faster rate. Lastly, compared to the endogenous uncertainty case, we find that if the probability surrounding a regime shift is exogenously given, this shadow price should even grow at a higher rate.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.197 · 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