MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Waterfront Partnership – Integration and Cooperation in Submarine Repair

2018· article· en· W2915954985 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aanchal Bagga, T J Dupuis

Bibliographic record

VenueConference Proceedings of INEC · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObsolescenceNavyGeneral partnershipScope (computer science)SubmarineWork (physics)Economic shortageBusinessOperations managementEngineering managementEngineeringComputer scienceFinancePolitical scienceMarketingGovernment (linguistics)Marine engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HMCS Victoria Repair Work Period was a strategic partnership between a naval repair facility and an industry partner fostering ground up cultural change and pushing the limits of integration at the waterfront. Many traditionalists might argue that partnering with industry via in-service-support (ISS) contracts is a precursor to rendering naval maintenance facilities redundant, thus accelerating their obsolescence. However, the HMCS Victoria Repair Work Period (VIC RWP) in the Royal Canadian Navy’s (RCN) dry dock in Esquimalt, BC presented a unique opportunity to further a philosophy predicated on an integrated and synergetic approach. A vast work scope, complex submarine design, supply chain issues exacerbated by specialized labour shortages, spurred a change to a long standing approach to submarine maintenance, namely with a Request for Proposal for integrated support resulting in a long-term partnership aimed at achieving the operational requirements of the RCN.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.013
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0010.016
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference Proceedings of INECSame topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207