Bibliographic record
Abstract
No accessJournal of Human SecurityEditorial01 January 2009Human Security in the Arctic - Yes, It Is Relevant! Authors: Gunhild Hoogensen; Dawn Bazely; Julia Christensen; Andrew Tanentzap; Evgeny Bojko Authors: Gunhild Hoogensen Associate Member, Human Security Institute and International Project Investigator for GAPS/University of Tromso, Norway, email: [email protected] Google Scholar More articles by this author ; Dawn Bazely Director, Institute for Research and Innovation in Sustainability, York University Canada Google Scholar More articles by this author ; Julia Christensen not listed Google Scholar More articles by this author ; Andrew Tanentzap not listed Google Scholar More articles by this author ; Evgeny Bojko Head, Department of Human Ecological and Social Physiology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Ural Division Google Scholar More articles by this author SectionsAboutPDF/EPUBExport CitationsAdd to FavouriteAdd to FavouriteCreate a New ListNameCancelCreate ToolsTrack CitationsCreate Clip ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedIn COPY LINK Full Text DOI Next article RelatedDetails View PUBLICATION DETAILSDate of Publication:January 2009Journal:Journal of Human SecurityISSN:1835-3800Volume:5Issue:2Page Range:1-10First Page:1Last Page:10Source:Journal of Human Security, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2009: 1-10Date Last Modified:05 September 2018 12:24Date Last Revised:21 September 2010Geographic LocationArctic RegionsSubjectFossil fuels--Environmental aspects METRICS Downloaded 0 times Copyright© Human Security Institute, 2009Download PDFLoading ...
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".