MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W340151377

Re-thinking and Re-engineering Cadastral and Land Administration Activities in Québec to Better Face the Challenges

2010· article· en· W340151377 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Roberge

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadastreSurveyorLand administrationFace (sociological concept)BusinessPopulationProcess (computing)Administration (probate law)Environmental planningKnowledge managementGeographyPolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineCartography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY As many land administration organizations worldwide, the Office of the Surveyor General of Quebec is facing major challenges. On one hand: difficulties to replace retired resources, governmental hiring restrictions, difficulties to attract youth in land surveying and geomatics and on the other hand, the governmental will to control the size of the state and offer better services to the population at a lower cost. In brief, doing more with fewer resources. This paper aims to present the re-thinking and re-engineering process followed to simplify, modernize and reorganize cadastral and land administration activities to face these challenges and develop more on-line services. This process includes: challenging the business model, regrouping small and specialized teams into a larger and more polyvalent one, revising and optimizing organizational processes with business partners, training and coaching human resources, modernizing systems, managing change, etc. This will lead the organization to be better designed to face the challenges.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgriculture and Rural Development Research→French-language works237,207→