Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of sustainable phosphorus is studied in depth around the world, as the scientific community largely agrees that the non-renewable phosphorus reserves in the form of phosphorite ore must be used judiciously. Unfortunately, many developed countries, including Canada, have yet to implement a phosphorus management plan. The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland can be heralded as success stories of effective, committed, cross-sector phosphorus management. We examine factors that contributed to their success and consider how these may be transferred to Canada. We also consider Canadian geographic and research factors and contrast the Canadian policy environment and phosphorus recycling efforts with those in the EU. Finally, we analyze active Canadian and North American phosphorus interest groups and seek to determine why their collective efforts have yet to coalesce around tangible action. Canada produces phosphorus fertilizer from imported deposits of phosphate rock. Canada produces potassium fertilizer from its rich potash mines, making it a global power in nutrient production. It is imperative that Canada earns a respected leadership role in efficient global phosphorus and potassium nutrient management and recycling.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".