MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561550840 · doi:10.7202/1038361ar

Environment for Science: A History of Policy for Science in Environment Canada. By Philip Enros. Toronto: Philip Enros, 2013. xi + 255 p., notes, ill., index. ISBN 978-0-99207-040-3, $32.95

2015· article· en· W2561550840 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Matthew L. Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian Indigenous Culture and History
Canadian institutionsCanada Foundation for Innovation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)HistoryEnvironmental ethicsMedia studiesSociologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environment for Science: A History of Policy for Science in Environment Canada. By Philip Enros. Toronto: Philip Enros, 2013. xi + 255 p., notes, ill., index. ISBN 978-0-99207-040-3, $32.95. An article from journal Scientia Canadensis (Volume 38, Number 2, 2015, pp. 1-109), on Érudit.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.012
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.013

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and MedicineSame topicAustralian Indigenous Culture and HistoryFrench-language works237,207