MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168962186 · doi:10.1109/arms.1988.196412

The Canadian armed forces approach to an improved readiness posture

2003· article· en· W2168962186 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gary J. Macfarlane

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversaryProcess (computing)Service (business)Computer scienceOperations researchComputer securityEngineering managementEngineeringBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author asserts that because of the current problems of technological change, of increasing complexity of weapons, of tighter integration demands among the Prime Fighting Vehicle (PFV), its support systems and the defense industrial base that underpins these system elements, of rapidly escalating acquisition and in-service support costs and of the prospect of zero-growth, if not actually declining, defense budgets, novel management approaches have to be found and implemented. An attempt is made to outline the approaches being pursued by the Canadian Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces (CF) to grapple with the issues these factors raise by exploiting the advantages of novel technology and information-processing capabilities. The Canadian Defence Department's acquisition process is shown to focus on the provision of weapons systems and equipment which will give the fighting elements of the CF as large an edge as possible over an enemy in combat.>

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDefense, Military, and Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207