MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993663922

Adopt-A-Minefield®: Engaging Civil Society in Mine Action

2005· article· en· W2993663922 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nahela Hadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMU Scholoraly Commons (James Madison University) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMine actionAction (physics)EngineeringCivil engineeringForensic engineeringMining engineeringConstruction engineeringWaste managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1998, following the signing of the Ottawa Convention, the United Nations Association of the USA (UNA-USA) began developing a program to address the landmine issue. The challenge was UNA-USA wanted to do more than just raise awareness of the landmine problem. We did not want to leave people without the ability to act once they had learned about the problem and felt compelled to act. We wanted to do something different through a program that would engage civil society in clearing minefields. Thus, the Adopt-A-Minefield (AAM) campaign was born.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMU Scholoraly Commons (James Madison University)Same topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207