MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11799738

Mining a Better Future: Approaching Economic Growth and Sustainable Communities in Context of Mining in Nunavut

2014· article· en· W11799738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadav Goelman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Environmental planningEnvironmental resource managementGeographyBusinessEnvironmental scienceArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource development near isolated communities in Nunavut exacerbates preexisting social problems that are insufficiently ameliorated by the policy frameworks addressing them.Data from Baker Lake shows rising crime rates correlating with the mine's arrival; and failure to ameliorate stagnant, declining education outcomes.The current framework of policy is comprised of loosely coordinated efforts by the federal and territorial governments.Supplemental community-driven research was found to identify additional interventions that garner renewed local support and heightened efficacy.Economic modeling of estimated costs and benefits of these interventions within three alternatives: a local, regional, or territorial rollout, revealed plausible net benefits at various discount rates.Additional qualitative evidence of pros and cons for each alternative supported recommendation of up to three local pilot project(s) to assess efficacy of these interventions to mitigate, ameliorate, and prevent the negative side effects of resource development in Nunavut, and remove barriers to equitable sustainable economic growth.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.179
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207