Oil Prices and the Hydrocarbon Markets: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we review the literature that investigates the impact of oil price shocks on the selected hydrocarbon prices. First, we present the empirical studies that presume, due to the global nature of the crude oil market, that the world oil price is an exogenous determining variable to the evolution of the local hydrocarbon markets such as natural gas or natural gas liquids (NGLs). Then, we present recent empirical studies that have improved our understanding of the source of oil price changes. They treat the real price of oil as an endogenous variable, identify the causes underlying oil price shocks, and then evaluate the impact of structural supply and demand shocks on the other hydrocarbon prices. The first strand of studies does not represent a consensus on the relationship between crude oil and other hydrocarbon prices—some demonstrate stable and asymmetric relationships, and some find no relationship or a very weak relationship. The second strand of studies shows that oil supply-side shocks have a transitory and temporary impact while oil demand-side shocks have a persistent and permanent impact on other hydrocarbon prices. In addition, it shows that the structural shocks in the global crude oil market explain approximately 50% of the variation in the other hydrocarbon markets in the long run.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".