MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122589484 · doi:10.14430/arctic401

IPY 2007–08 and the Resurgence of Northern (& Polar) Research in Canada

2010· article· en· W2122589484 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David S. Hik

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPolarFoundation (evidence)Political scienceWork (physics)GeographyBiologyEngineeringLawEcologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL POLAR YEAR (IPY) in 1882 – 83 was one of the earliest globally coordinated scientific efforts, and its success provided a model for subsequent programs of coordinated international research. The coming IPY in 2007 – 08 (actually extending to 2009) will be a major event that contributes to the advancement of polar knowledge, research and technology and establishes a new foundation and legacy for future decades of work. Canada has recognized that indigenous and non-indigenous residents of polar regions must participate directly in defining the IPY research programs.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicPolar Research and EcologyFrench-language works237,207