MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2859341891

That was the year that might happen again

2016· article· en· W2859341891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Syrett

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Minerals · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBankruptcyPotashBusinessFinanceNatural resource economicsEngineeringCommerceEconomicsMaterials scienceMetallurgy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some of the most eye-catching events of 2015 included the bankruptcy of US rare earths miner, Molycorp Inc., the splitting up of global chemicals giant, DuPont, a litany of scandals for Chile's Sociedad Quimica y Minera (SQM) and a number of failed merger attempts, including Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan (PotashCorp) and K+S AG in potash, Iluka Resources Ltd and Kenmare Resources Ltd in mineral sands, Saint-Gobain SA and Sika AG in speciality chemicals, and Halliburton Inc. and Baker Hughes Inc. in oilfield minerals. Away from dwelling the past, this first 2016 issue of IM also has a forward-looking angle, in the form of an article by Vladislav Vorotnikov, IM Correspondent, discussing how Russian embargo on imports of Western foods could benefit the country's mothballed zeolite industry ( pp30-32 ). For this month's Refractories Hotline, Liz Gyekye, Chief Reporter, spoke to leading Brazilian refractories producer, Magnesita Refratarios SA, about how end user demands for quality, efficiency and value for money are setting demanding but achievable goals for the most agile and technically capable businesses in the in the sector ( pp28-29 ).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.013

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial MineralsSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207