Environment Canada cuts threaten the future of science and international agreements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In August 2011, 300 Environment Canada scientists and staff working on environmental monitoring and protection learned that their jobs would be terminated, and an additional 400‐plus Environment Canada employees received notice that their positions were targeted for elimination. These notices received widespread coverage in the Canadian media and international attention in Nature News. Environment Canada is a government agency responsible for meteorological services as well as environmental research. We are concerned that research and observations related to ozone depletion, tropospheric pollution, and atmospheric transport of toxic chemicals in the northern latitudes may be seriously imperiled by the budget cuts that led to these job terminations. Further, we raise the questions being asked by the international community, scientists, and policy makers alike: First, will Canada be able to meet its obligations to the monitoring and assessment studies that support the various international agreements inTable 1? Second, will Canada continue to be a leader in Arctic research.
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 | 0.017 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".