Unraveling the link between political polarization and wind energy perspectives: Insights from a survey of agricultural landowners in Alberta, Canada
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
Wind energy development can be polarizing with opposition coming from rural regions that are most affected by new wind farms. Local opposition can become further entrenched through political ideologies, where one's perspective on wind turbines becomes a litmus test for one's political position. With these concerns in mind, we utilize results from a survey of large-scale agricultural landowners in Alberta, Canada, to answer the following question. To what extent are self-declared political positions consistent with views on wind energy development? Results indicate that wind energy acceptance is not politically polarized nor even polarized among Alberta's rural landowners. Instead, the sample reveals fragmented, moderate, and likely malleable opinions about wind energy. Within a jurisdiction that is politically conservative and fossil fuel dependent, these results have largely positive implications for future wind energy development in the province.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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