MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801325181 · doi:10.55016/ojs/sppp.v10i1.43054

Big and Little Feet Provincial Profiles: Manitoba

2017· article· en· W2801325181 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Dobson, G. Kent Fellows

Bibliographic record

VenueThe School of Public Policy Publications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsGreenhouse gasConsumption (sociology)Context (archaeology)Production (economics)Agricultural economicsInvestment (military)Environmental scienceBusinessNatural resource economicsEconomicsGeographyPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This communiqué provides a summary of the production- and consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions accounts for Manitoba, as well as their associated trade flows. It is part of a series of communiqués profiling the Canadian provinces and territories.1 In simplest terms, a production-based emissions account measures the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions produced in Manitoba. In contrast, a consumption-based emissions account measures the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions generated during the production process for final goods and services that are consumed in Manitoba through household purchases, investment by firms and government spending. Trade flows refer to the movement of emissions that are produced in Manitoba but which support consumption in a different province, territory or country (and vice versa). For example, emissions associated with the production of Manitoba crops that are exported to Ontario for processing and sale in an Ontario grocery store are recorded as a trade flow from Manitoba to Ontario. Moving in the opposite direction, emissions associated with the production of motor gasoline in Alberta that is exported to Manitoba for sale are recorded as a trade flow from Alberta to Manitoba. For further details on these results in a national context, the methodology for generating them and their policy implications, please see the companion papers to this communiqué series: (1) Fellows and Dobson (2017); and (2) Dobson and Fellows (2017). Additionally, the consumption emissions and trade flow data for each of the provinces and territories are available at: http://www.policyschool.ca/embodied-emissions-inputs-outputs-datatables-2004-2011/.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.017
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.010

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe School of Public Policy PublicationsSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207