MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038261343 · doi:10.1080/1354983022000027527

Leaders of the Pack: An analysis of the Canadian 'Sustainable Communities' 2000 municipal competition

2002· article· en· W2038261343 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal Environment · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetition (biology)SustainabilityVisionStakeholderGovernment (linguistics)BusinessLocal governmentEconomic growthPolitical sciencePublic administrationPublic relationsEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first annual Sustainable Community competition, co-sponsored by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and CH2M Hill in 2000, received 52 submissions from municipalities across Canada. These submissions were systematically analysed to identify common characteristics shared by competition entrants, including what differentiates competition participants from other Canadian municipalities, what kinds of sustainability projecs municipalities have been most likely to undertake and what motivating and success factors are most commonly cited. Urban municipalities were more likely than rural municipalities to undertake sustainability projects. Stakeholder involvement was found to be the most important factor in determining the success of a project. Many projects in the competition had not identified clear holistic visions and benchmarks, and these were noted as areas where improvement could be made. The impact of higher levels of government in setting benchmarks and providing support was also noteworthy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.216 · 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