MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983658112

National Approaches to Hydrocarbon Development: Unitization and Unit Operating Agreements

2025· book· en· W6983658112 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

VenueRepository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) · 2025
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnit (ring theory)Resource (disambiguation)Natural resourceField (mathematics)Best practiceWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book analyses the legal obstacles associated with the advancement of unitization processes and procedures at a national, domestic level.It uses case studies of identified jurisdictions with relevant States practice and unitization experience in terms of the domestic legal framework and practices. For experience in unitization, the book will focus on the following countries: the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Norway, Brazil, Mexico, Ghana and Nigeria. Focusing on best practices which have influenced the development of the unitization concept, the book looks at the formulation of different models and operating agreements, and their potential impact on unexplored hydrocarbon resources, particularly in cases where unitization is necessary.The book will be of interest to practitioners, scholars and students in the field of natural resource law, international law and unitization.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.111 · 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