MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976973580 · doi:10.2524/jtappij.59.714

A Report on the PAPTAC (Canada) 91st Annual Meeting

2005· article· en· W1976973580 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kunitaka Toyofuku

Bibliographic record

VenueJAPAN TAPPI JOURNAL · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAcademic Publishing and Open Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

第91回PAPTAC (カナダ紙パルプ技術協会) 年次大会が2005年2月8~10日にカナダのモントリオールで開催され, これに参加したので概略を紹介する。年次大会は, 展示会と合わせて参加者1万名以上, 展示会は400社以上ということで, 単一の年次大会では世界一の規模であろう。講演の内容は純学問的なものから, 企業の宣伝的なものまで, いろいろとあり, 幅広い内容となっている。カナダは, 日本に比べて, 紙パルプの生産量は少ないが, 国としての産業の重要性が日本より高く, 紙パルを研究する大学が, トロント大学, マクマスター大学, マギール大学, ニューブルンスウィック大学, ブリティッシュコロンビア大学等多数あり, 事実, これらの大学から, 発表が行われた。また, 研究機関として, パプリカンとエコールポリテックがあり, なかでも, パプリカンは圧倒的多数の発表を行っていた。口頭発表総数は146件, 別に, 大学院生の発表が17件あった。カナダが93件, 海外が53件で, 海外では, 米国29件, フィンランド9件, ドイツ6件が主なところである。内容は, プロセス毎の製紙技術, メカニカルパルプ, 新技術, 漂白, IT技術の利用, 繊維特性の研究といったものから, 非木材, リサイクル, 環境まで, 幅広い内容となっている。日本の紙パルプ技術協会は, 年次大会は企業中心で行い, 研究発表を主体とした紙パルプ研究発表会を別途開催しているが, PAPTACはこれを一緒に行っているのが特徴である。

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.030

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAPAN TAPPI JOURNALSame topicAcademic Publishing and Open AccessFrench-language works237,207