MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491623489 · doi:10.1201/b13146-18

Remedial Action Plan

2012· book-chapter· en· W2491623489 on OpenAlex
Lori Boughton

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Publishers eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationGovernment (linguistics)Action planRemedial educationPlan (archaeology)Action (physics)Quality (philosophy)Environmental planningBusinessPolitical sciencePublic administrationEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEnvironmental scienceLawManagementEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It should be noted that an inherent strength of the Water Quality Agreement is that it provides a venue for government to government interaction and negotiation where the common interests of the Great Lakes supercedes the separate interest of the two countries. Changes in the relationships between U.S. EPA, Environment Canada and the IJC (which no longer retains its governmental oversight role) along with other factors, such as the U.S. countryspecifi c focus under both the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Restoration Strategy and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (to be discussed later) seem to be undermining the binational cooperation that has developed over the 30plus years of experience with the Water Quality Agreement (Botts and Muldoon 2005). Th is should be a concern to all who value the successful binational process that recognizes the ecosystem fi rst rather than country-specifi c priorities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.214 · 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