MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015770253 · doi:10.7202/021056ar

The Effects of the Division of the City of Lloydminster by the Alberta-Saskatchewan Inter-Provincial Boundary

2005· article· en· W2015770253 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
T. L. Dykstra, R. G. Ironside

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalGovernment of AlbertaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterLegislationJurisdictionGovernment (linguistics)Boundary (topology)Order (exchange)BusinessPublic administrationLocal governmentEconomic growthPolitical scienceFinanceLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper traces the effects of the superimposed inter-provincial boundary line on the development of Lloydminster. Duplication of public services, and other difficulties encouraged early efforts to amalgamate the community under one jurisdiction. This was accomplished in 1930 and the city is operated under special legislation which is called the « Lloydminster Charter ». Inherent inefficiencies still remain for civic government as well as disadvantages for private enterprises as the provincial legislation of Alberta or Saskatchewan prevails depending upon which side of the boundary a person resides, works, shops, or an economic enterprise is located. The sales tax levied on most purchases by the Saskatchewan Government remains a problem for retailers and citizens. Most of the commercial and industrial development is occurring on the Alberta side of the City. There is evidence that industrial and commercial companies, professional people and residents, would prefer the City to be either in Alberta or Saskatchewan in order to eradicate the inefficiencies and irritations caused by the division of the city by the boundary.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de géographie du QuébecSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207