MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747944190

A Regional Approach to Drinking Water Management: NL-BC Comparative Water Systems Study

2015· article· en· W2747944190 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah‐Patricia Breen, Sarah Minnes

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional resilience and development
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Environmental planningSustainabilityEnvironmental resource managementBusinessWater securityContext (archaeology)Scale (ratio)GeographyWater resourcesEnvironmental scienceEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water is recognized as a basic human right, a critical service, a fundamental for sustainability, and a building block for resilience. In Canada, rural areas face unique challenges when it comes to drinking water management (e.g., multi-use watersheds, low population density, lack of economies of scale). Not only are these challenges in the present, but these unique issues are also important in terms of future adaptation and can act as barriers to future community and regional resilience. Research indicates that while managing drinking water is a critical issue for rural Canada, current management approaches appear to be ill equipped to address this issue, particularly in the context of regional resilience. In this report we propose a new approach to managing drinking water, using the regional scale and incorporating best practices related to regional development, new regionalism, regional resilience, water management, and sustainable infrastructure.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicRegional resilience and developmentFrench-language works237,207