La gestion nord-américaine des ressources hydrauliques, un modèle exportable ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Si le partage des ressources hydrauliques entre États entraîne souvent des relations conflictuelles, il existe des situations dans lesquelles la gestion de l'accès à l'eau peut se dérouler de manière pacifiée. Ainsi, les États-Unis et le Canada sont-ils parvenus à un consensus sur le partage de leurs eaux douces. Le fait que le Canada, bien que situé en amont, n'ait pas nécessairement cherché à imposer des conditions draconiennes à son voisin méridional, a favorisé les bonnes relations. Les États-Unis tirent dès lors, et malgré leur statut de pays d'aval, un large bénéfice des ressources en eau provenant du Canada. L'institution d'une Commission d'arbitrage et de règlement des différends est également pour beaucoup dans la gestion saine des eaux transfrontalières américano-canadiennes.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".