MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2733624221 · doi:10.55016/ojs/sppp.v2i1.42323

Saving NORAD: Should Ottawa Seize the Obama Moment?

2009· article· en· W2733624221 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph T. Jockel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe School of Public Policy Publications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoment (physics)Political sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) is heading for obsolescence. Saving it would require reversing the Martin government’s 2005 “no” on missile defence. The Obama presidency provides the Harper government with some political cover to do so. Ottawa could also seize the opportunity to reconsider the Chrétien government’s 2002 decision not to consider broadly expanding NORAD’s roles. While it will be tempting to try to save NORAD for symbolic reasons,it should be let go. The U.S. and Canada no longer need a binational aerospace command. The focus should be on air defence cooperation, especially for special events such as the 2010 Vancouver Olympics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe School of Public Policy Publications→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→