MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758884991 · doi:10.25071/2292-4736/39796

The Treaty 8 First Nations and BC Hydro's Site C Dam

2017· article· en· W2758884991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan Kucic-Riker

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderCurrents Journal of Critical Environmental Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyHydroelectricityLawsuitPopulationGeographyPeace treatyCertificateEnvironmental protectionGovernment (linguistics)LawEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceEngineeringPoliticsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Site C Clean Energy Project is a proposed dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in northeast British Columbia, seven kilometers southwest of the city of Fort St. John. The proposed site―within the Peace River Valley―is home to BC’s Treaty 8 First Nations with an approximate Aboriginal population of 2500-3000 people (T8TA, "Treaty 8 Communities"). The project's proponent, BC Hydro, received environmental approval for Site C from the federal and provincial governments on October 14, 2014 (BCEAO Conditional Environmental Assessment Certificate Granted: Site C Clean Energy Project; CEAA "Government of Canada's Decision on the Environmental Assessment of the Site C Clean Energy Project"); however, the project still requires an investment decision from the Province and regulatory permits and authorization before it can proceed to construction (BC Hydro, "Multi-Stage Evaluation"). The Treaty 8 First Nations are opposing Site C, having filed a lawsuit on grounds that the project would have a devastating impact on their traditional land and thus violate their treaty rights (Keller)...Find full text in .pdf below.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.010

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderCurrents Journal of Critical Environmental StudiesSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207