Exploring Innovation in Northern Canada with Insights from the Mining Innovation System in Greater Sudbury, Ontario
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Northern Review 45 (2017): 33–56 https://doi.org/10.22584/nr45.2017.003This article provides an exploratory examination of the innovation dynamics in northern Canada, situated within the broader literature on staples theory, regional development, and regional innovation systems. It uses a case study on the mining innovation system in Greater Sudbury, Ontario—one of the most advanced regional innovation systems in northern Canada—to highlight the importance of innovation support institutions, government intervention, and building on competitive advantages. The article also explores a number of geographic, social, and economic challenges that can hinder entrepreneurship, innovation, and, ultimately, economic development in regions across the North. These include geographic remoteness and isolation, small and often sparsely populated regions, and development approaches that do little to facilitate the reinvestment of resource wealth back into regional development.
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 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 it