MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112444067

Exposing Canada's chemical valley : an investigation of cumulative air pollution emissions in the Sarnia, Ontario area

2007· article· en· W3112444067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena Macdonald, S Rang

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir pollutionPollutionEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental sciencePollutantGreenhouse gasEnvironmental engineeringGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nearly 40 per cent of Canada's chemical industry is clustered near the town of Sarnia, Ontario, which is now considered one of the most polluted places in Canada. In 2005, facilities located near the Sarnia area emitted more than 131 million kg of national pollutant release inventory chemicals. Facilities in the area emitted 16.5 million tonnes of greenhouse gases (GHGs) as well as 5.7 million kg of toxic air pollutants known to cause cancer and endocrine disorders in humans. The cumulative emissions produced from facilities in the region as well as from facilities in the nearby United States have made the region Ontario's worst air pollution hotspot. The emissions are now impacting the health of both the residents of Sarnia and the Aamjiwnaang First Nation. Local ecosystems have also been compromised. This report highlighted strategies that may be used to reduce emissions in the region. The report reviewed various aggressive pollution prevention strategies, as well as the enforcement of existing laws and regulatory standards. It was concluded that federal and local governments, as well as First Nations must take the necessary steps to improve and protect the health of communities in the region. 11 refs., 15 tabs., 14 figs.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207