Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The motto of the 2011 Ottawa Annual General meeting of the Geological and Mineralogical associations of Canada, “Navigating Past & Future Change”, was intended to highlight our commitment, as a scientific community, to the exploration of both the science and societal significance of the Earth Sciences. What I intend to do in this Presidential Address is to turn the motto around and restate it as a question: What is the scientific and societal significance of the Earth Sciences? This is not an idle question. Many of those attending the Ottawa GAC–MAC meeting are dependent upon a government paycheque, either because we work in universities or for government labs and surveys. In addition, much of our research is funded by government grants, most notably through the NSERC Discovery grants program. In other words, our jobs and our research are dependent upon public recognition of our contribution to society. So what is the scientific and societal significance of the Earth Sciences? To answer that question I want to go back to a remarkable time in our history, the late 1700s, and in particular to three key developments of that time. Those developments were nothing less than 1) Hutton’s discovery of deep time; 2) Smith’s invention of the modern geological map; and 3) the realization that humans are a component of the Earth system. These three intellectual leaps all occurred at the exact moment that atmospheric CO2 concentrations started their inexorable and ongoing rise. As the scientists most responsible for finding the coal, oil, gas and mineral resources on which modern society is built, we can take a great deal of pride in the role that geology and the Earth Sciences have played in civilization’s evolution over the past two hundred and fifty years. The prosperity of modern society is rooted in the discovery of deep time and the invention of the geological map: that is our legacy. It is, however, in addressing and understanding our role in the Earth system that our future scientific and societal significance is to be found.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".