MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953086004

Women and Mine Development: Capturing Vulnerability Using Open Data and GIS

2015· article· en· W2953086004 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alison Stockwell

Bibliographic record

Venue2015-Sustainable Industrial Processing Summit · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)GeographyEnvironmental planningWork (physics)Environmental resource managementEngineeringComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aboriginal and rural women are among the most vulnerable members of Canadian society and are particularly vulnerable to health impacts associated with the extractive industry (EI) such as increased substance abuse, domestic and community violence and prostitution. Yet, these impacts remain largely unidentified and unmitigated in Canadian federal and provincial EIAs. In British Columbia (BC), EI project proponents, impact assessors, reviewers and communities themselves have open access to robust digital health and spatial datasets. These datasets can be used to identify areas and populations vulnerable to impacts during the EIA process, as well as track conditions over time to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures. In 2010, community members in north-central BC approached the research team to help them better understand and prepare for health impacts associated with a new open-pit 110,000 tonne/day Copper-Gold Mine. Community members expressed dissatisfaction with how the EIA process captured community health issues such as loss of land, increased traffic, in-migration, impacts on health and social services, crime and violence and the vulnerability of women and youth. As part of this research project, this work seeks to improve how the EIA process captures and addresses impacts to women living in remote communities in BC. This presentation proposes a tool for better capturing the vulnerability of rural and Aboriginal women living in remote areas to violence and violent victimization associated with extractive projects. This web-based, GIS tool will integrate existing health and spatial datasets to identify areas of BC where violence is endemic and women may be vulnerable in effort for communities, proponents, and government to better plan and implement mitigation measures that address violence. This research is part of the Extractive Industry and Community Health Project funded by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2015-Sustainable Industrial Processing SummitSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207