Caught in Crossfire: Les Enjeux Interjuridictionnels de la Gestion de l’Eau Agricole dans le Bassin Versant de da Rivière des Outaouais (Caught in Crossfire: Interjurisdictional Agricultural Water Management Challenges in the Ottawa River Watershed)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Ce rapport s'interesse aux enjeux interjuridictionnels de la gestion de l'eau a l'echelle du bassin versant de la riviere des Outaouais, particulierement a travers le spectre des activites agricoles. Commandite par l'Institut canadien des politiques agroalimentaires, ce document de recherche expose, d'un point de vue juridique, la complexite du contexte entourant la gestion de l'eau dans le bassin versant des Outaouais et preconise certaines recommandations. English Abstract: This technical report is looking at interjurisdictional water management challenges in the Ottawa River Watershed, especially through the spectrum of agricultural practices. Sponsored by the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute, this research paper demonstrates, from a legal point of view, the intricate context surrounding water management in the Ottawa river watershed and suggests a set of recommandations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".