Analyse économique des activités du Service de sécurité incendie de Montréal : une étude exploratoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legislation, regulation and security codes but also the activities of the fire department contribute to the reduction of the number of fires and the associated damage. But all these instruments are expensive. The CIRANO was contracted to perform an exploratory economic analysis of the activities of the fire department in Montreal. On-going research shows that the existence of a fire department present considerable potential (in terms of effectiveness and impacts). Thus the CIRANO's research project regroups all the elements necessary to make it possible to adequately structure a future reflection concerning : (1) the justification of certain investments and the sharing of costs associated; (2) public decisions of allowance of the resources for the fire protection organizations; (3) the evaluation of the relevance to set up partnerships (for example : with the insurers or other speakers in emergency management). To conclude, this report proposes a summary examination of the principal options of financing at the disposal of the SSIM, starting from an economic reflection and reality lived in other jurisdictions, overlaid on the analysis cost benefits developed in the preceding chapters. No date is fixed to share the complete version of the document. La législation, la réglementation et les codes de sécurité mais aussi les activités des services d'incendie contribuent à la réduction du nombre d'incendies et des dommages associés. Mais ces mesures sont coûteuses. Le mandat du CIRANO consiste à effectuer une étude exploratoire concernant l'analyse économique des activités du Service de sécurité incendie de Montréal. Les recherches en cours montrent que l'existence d'un service de sécurité incendie présente des potentialités considérables (en termes d'efficacité et d'impacts). Le projet de recherche du CIRANO regroupe donc l'ensemble des éléments nécessaires pour permettre de bien structurer une réflexion future concernant (1) la justification de certains investissements et le partage des coûts associés ; (2) les décisions publiques d'allocation des ressources pour les services d'incendie ; (3) l'évaluation de la pertinence de mettre en place des partenariats (par exemple avec les assureurs ou avec d'autres intervenants en mesures d'urgence). Pour conclure, ce rapport propose un examen sommaire des principales options de financement à la disposition du SSIM, à partir d'une réflexion économique et de la réalité vécue dans d'autres juridictions, superposées à l'analyse coûts-bénéfices développée dans les chapitres précédents. Aucune date n'a été fixée encore pour rendre disponible la version complète du document.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".