MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898566836 · doi:10.1109/services.2018.00015

Pattern Recognition on Usage of Operational Clothing in Canadian Armed Forces

2018· article· en· W2898566836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manchun Fang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingPoint (geometry)Operational costsBusinessDatabase transactionTransaction dataComputer scienceOperations managementOperations researchMarketingEngineeringDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Department of National Defence has been issuing Operational Clothing at no cost to Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members based on tear and wear through clothing stores for many years. A significant change will be introduced: CAF is considering using annual point allocations and quantity caps to manage the expenditure of Operational Clothing though an e-business. To build such a point system, this research studied usage patterns of Operational Clothing and identified the differentiating factors affecting the usage patterns based on ten years of massive individual clothing transaction data and individual personnel data. Not only traditional statistical tests but also diagnostic analytics have been used for the analysis. The results of this study will inform decision making on the establishment of the new point system for managing expenditure of the Operational Clothing for CAF.

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)0.002
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 score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207