Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of low pH waters seeping from a uranium mine waste rock dump in northern Saskatchewan initiated the investigation into the potential for acid mine drainage conditions to exist at the mines in northern Saskatchewan. Studies conducted by the companies operating in the province and the Saskatchewan Environment and Public Safety Mineral Industry Environmental Protection Branch (MIEPB) identified acidic seeps at each of the mining operations. Once identified the question asked was, "how do we assess the problem?". To be consistent in the approach to assessing the problem the MIEPB decided to publish a guideline that would be a reference manual for the mining companies, government agencies and other interest groups. To ensure that the manual was current the MIEPB contracted a consulting firm to, under the direction of the MIEPB, write the document. The most important criteria that the consultant had to meet was that of producing a document that was not a text book but rather a "hands-on" users manual. If success can be measured in numbers then the over two hundred and fifty requests that we have had for the Guidelines would indicate to us that the Guidelines are a success.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".