AVALANCHE THREATS AND MITIGATION MEASURES IN CANADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This is a summary of the Public Safety Canada commissioned report to inventory current and predict future trends in avalanche threats and mitigation programs in Canada. By the winter of 2007, avalanches were responsible for at least 702 fatalities in Canada since the earliest recorded incident in 1782. Avalanches can affect people travelling and working on transportation corridors, ski area recreationists and workers, backcountry recreationists and guides, resource industry workers, energy generation facilities and transmission lines, and people in or near public and residential buildings. In addition to hazard assessments, mitigation programs include forecasting and control programs for roads, railroads, ski areas, commercial backcountry recreation operations, resource industry worksites and roads, energy generation facilities and transmission lines, as well as public and residential land use areas. Public programs provide avalanche safety education and avalanche conditions reports, forecasts, and warnings to self-directed backcountry recreationists. However, non-mitigated avalanche threats exist to all activity types in Canada. With the exception of residential and public land use, the various types of activity in avalanche terrain are expected to either maintain current levels or increase.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".