Differential perception of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear terrorism in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the Canadian national public survey of perceived chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) terrorism threat and preparedness, 1502 Canadians were recently interviewed by telephone. This paper presents a descriptive examination of perceptions of the occurrence of terrorist bombings and CBRN terrorism in Canada on a number of evaluative dimensions, including perceived likelihood, uncertainty, severity, personal impact and ability to cope should such an event occur. Overall, Canadians perceived that the occurrence of terrorism in Canada was associated with serious consequences and would have a great impact on their lives. However, they also perceived that such an event was unlikely to occur. Terrorist bombings were perceived as the most likely to occur but were perceived as having the least severe consequences. The converse was found for perceptions of nuclear terrorist attacks. Perceptions varied by demographic background, with gender and education representing important determinants. The implications of findings for risk management and communication are discussed.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it