MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065760581 · doi:10.14714/cp44.512

The Atlas of Canada Web Mapping: The User Counts

2003· article· en· W2065760581 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donna Williams, Douglas O'Brien, Eric Kramers

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographic Perspectives · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Thematic mapWorld Wide WebThe InternetComputer scienceCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imagine if…A student searches the Internet to get information for a project on Victoria for a grade nine geography class. He uses Google to search for “Victoria” and “geography”. First on the list of search results is The Atlas of Canada. He quickly selects this and arrives at the home page of the Atlas. He sees that he can search for a place and he does so for Victoria. He finds there are many places named Victoria in Canada and is able to find the one in British Columbia for which he is looking. He then sees that he can link from the location map to combine themes with the place. The thematic material includes all the types of information he is required to put into his project. Not only can he see the maps, which he decides to use as the basis for his project, but also the background data used to make the map. He notices an audio button that he clicks on to get a description of the map and a video button, which brings up an interesting video clip. He then finds that a full description is available that also provides links to other sites that may be of interest. Everything he needs is in this one great Web site. From now on, The Atlas of Canada is where he will start all his assignments.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.020
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.014

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographic PerspectivesSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207