MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400945388 · doi:10.17981/ingecuc.17.1.2021.16

Fracking as a guarantee of Energy Security in countries with low conventional oil reserves

2021· article· en· W4400945388 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angie Tatiana Ortega-Ramírez, Diego Fernando Marín Maldonado

Bibliographic record

VenueInge CUC · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy securityBusinessOil reservesNatural resource economicsLow energyEnvironmental sciencePetroleumRenewable energyEconomicsGeologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction— Fracking is one of the most recent techniques presented by the hydrocarbon industry to guarantee the extraction of oil from non-conventional fields and thus maintain the energy security of many countries such as the United States, China, Canada, and even is one of the potential practices in Colombia. Although it is a promising technique because of its advanced level of engineering, its impacts, and environmental effects are today a subject of debate partly due to limited information and limited detailed research on the consequences. Objective— This article presents the generalities of the technique, a historical timeline, advantages and disadvantages of the implementation, successful cases, and the implications on the environment. Methodology— This is achieved through a review and classification of information from studies and research developed in the world on the named technique. Results— The advantages are clear: increase in proven reserves, energy independence, increased employment, economic development, among others. Conclusions— There are disadvantages such as excessive use of water, use of toxic additives, generation of earthquakes, and negative environmental effects. All of the above is related to previous investigations carried out with fracking.

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 score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInge CUCSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207