MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989372279

Are Royalty Agreements Required For\nCanada East Coast Offshore Oil And Gas?

2001· article· en· W6989372279 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProperty Rights and Legal Doctrine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureSubmarine pipelineNova scotiaEast coastProduction (economics)Petroleum industryOil production
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the royalty regime in the area offshore the two oil and gas producing provinces on the east coast of Canada. A review of the historical background of the legislative framework is provided. The right to levy royalties on the production of oil and gas is reviewed. The legislative provisions relating to the execution of royalty agreements and the introduction of generic royalty regulations are examined. The article describes specific fiscal and commercial terms which are not included in the current Nova Scotia generic royalty regime and might not be included in the generic regime which might be proposed by Newfoundland. The article concludes that, in all instances, a royalty agreement in some form will be required.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicProperty Rights and Legal DoctrineFrench-language works237,207