MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W171235863

Government of Canada Initiatives in Support of the Joint Convention

2006· article· en· W171235863 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter A. Brown, Douglas Metcalfe, R. Lojk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionGovernment (linguistics)BusinessRadioactive wasteSpent nuclear fuelJoint (building)EngineeringEnvironmental planningWaste managementPublic administrationLawPolitical scienceCivil engineeringEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Government of Canada strongly supported international efforts to bring into force the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management (the Joint Convention), and was the second country to ratify it. The Joint Convention places a number of obligations on Contracting Parties aimed at achieving and maintaining a high level of safety worldwide in spent fuel and radioactive waste management, ensuring that effective defenses against potential hazards are in place during all management stages, preventing accidents with radiological consequences and mitigating their consequences should they occur. In addition to establishing and maintaining a modem regulatory framework and an independent regulatory body through the 2000 Nuclear Safety and Control Act, the Government of Canada has implemented a number of initiatives that address its responsibilities and serve to further enhance Canada's compliance with the Joint Convention. For nuclear fuel waste, the Government of Canada brought into force the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act in 2002 to require waste owners to develop, fund, organize and implement a long-term solution for Canada's nuclear fuel waste. The Act clearly reserves for Government the decision on the solution to be implemented in the best interests of Canadians,more » as well as oversight to ensure that waste owners are fulfilling their responsibilities. In the case of low-level radioactive waste, long-term solutions are being developed to ensure the protection of health, safety, and the environment, both now and in the future. Regarding uranium mine and mill tailings, current operators have state-of-the-art waste management facilities in place. The Government of Canada works with provincial governments to ensure that any potential abandoned or legacy mines sites where no owner can be held responsible are safely decommissioned and managed over the long term. (authors)« less

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0180.005
Scholarly communication0.0210.003
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0120.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207