MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234792005

Beyond the Border Action Plan: A Tool for Enhanced Canada-U.S. Cooperation on Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security - Or More Window Dressing, The

2012· article· en· W2234792005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William de Laat

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada-United States law journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction planPlan (archaeology)Critical infrastructureAction (physics)Computer securityWindow (computing)BusinessWindow of opportunityComputer scienceGeographyManagementWorld Wide WebEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there is ample recognition in both countries of the deep integration of the Canadian and American economies, our mutual reliance on an intricate web of interconnected physical and cyber infrastructure is often overlooked.With few exceptions, governments and the private sector have a limited understanding of the complex interdependencies between these shared systems and networks, and the enormous economic fallout that can result from major infrastructure failures.Canada and the United States have made only modest progress to date in addressing issues related to their shared critical infrastructures and cyber systems.Neither country has devoted sufficient resources nor shown a sustained commitment to making shared infrastructures more resilient and less vulnerable to failure or attack.Both governments have been slow to put in place effective policies and procedures to anticipate, manage, and recover from major crossborder infrastructure disruptions.Joint initiatives in the Beyond the Border Action Plan ("BTBAP")' and the Canada-United States Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure ("CUSCI"), 2 have not been given priority by senior officials in either country and have failed to set out a coherent set of deliverables, deadlines, and accountabilities.This, in turn, has left private sector stakeholders to fend largely for themselves, with little direction from government.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0190.012
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanada-United States law journalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207