MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411092512 · doi:10.51594/csitrj.v6i5.1935

Predictive modelling and spatial flow analysis of United States of America crude oil imports

2025· article· en· W4411092512 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science & IT Research Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrude oilEnvironmental scienceFlow (mathematics)EconometricsEconomicsNatural resource economicsPetroleum engineeringGeologyMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global energy system significantly dependent on crude oil and it is also a major driver of the transportation industry and petrochemical production. By 2040, oil and gas will likely account for over half of the universal energy mix due to increasing demands in various countries of the world, despite developing interest in renewable energy. The United States is a major importer of crude oil due to the role it plays in the country’s economy and energy requirements. Nevertheless, economic uncertainty and geopolitical tensions, such as the battle between Russia and Ukraine, weaken global oil markets. Hence, the need for countries to be able to understand how their supply would be affected. In order to enhance how countries can predict their future supply from different sources, this study evaluates the predictive performance of two machine learning (ML) models: Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Regression (SVR) in relation to the commonly used Linear Regression (LR). Data of crude oil import from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Canada and Russia into the USA from 1973 to 2023 was obtained for the study from Energy Information Administration. The data were subjected to clearing. Afterwards, 80% of the data was trained while 20% were used to test the predictive performance of the three models by predicting the import flows from 2024 to 2033. Metrics used for the test were root-mean-squared error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE). Maps were used to visualise the flow of the crude oil imports from each country based on the data and the prediction of the three models. With an RMSE of 259.35 and an MAE of 169.17, Random Forest scored better than the other models, showing balanced geographical flows and high predicted accuracy from important importers like Saudi Arabia and Canada. On the other hand, due to their difficulties with nonlinear dynamics, SVR (RMSE: 568.04, MAE: 365.99) and Linear Regression (RMSE: 538.02, MAE: 384.77) performed poorly. Random Forest's ability to forecast import volumes and optimize trade routes was confirmed by spatial flow maps. The result suggest that energy security and supply chain resilience can be improved by incorporating ML models and geographical analysis into energy planning. Keywords: Crude Oil, Machine learning, Random Forest, Linear Regression, Support Vector Regression.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.318 · 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