MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399654477 · doi:10.54097/errpwt51

Critique of Oil Sand Exploitation in Indigenous Community from a Perspective of Political Ecology

2024· article· en· W4399654477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Qinghui Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Science Engineering and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPolitical ecologyEcologyPoliticsPerspective (graphical)GeographySociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceBiologyPhilosophyLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high demand of energy and the goal of reducing energy-related pollution emission are both urgent needs in contemporary global discussion, and the topic of sustainable development and the concept of sustainability are integrated through the discussions. Canada is one of the largest oil-producing states due to its large oil sands deposits in Northern regions where is also important reservoir for indigenous communities. The large-scale oil sand extraction by energy corporations and the promotion from governments along with the colonial heritage has caused degradation in vulnerable indigenous communities environmentally, socially, and culturally. This paper adopts a political ecology approach and integrates the study of extractivism and the concepts of consumption and metabolic rift into the case analysis on the power structure underlying the oil sands exploitation in McMurray Metis indigenous community, which provides an insight into unequal and asymmetric power structure among the oil industry, the government, the indigenous community, and the public.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHighlights in Science Engineering and TechnologySame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207