MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244241534 · doi:10.24124/2012/bpgub867

Towards First Nations energy self-sufficiency: Analyzing the renewable energy partnership between T'sou-ke Nation and Skidegate Band.

2012· dissertation· en· W4244241534 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Ozog

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsCanadian HeritageUniversity of VictoriaLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipSustainabilityRenewable energyPolitical scienceEconomic growthSolar energyEngineeringGeographyEconomicsEcologyLawElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First Nations communities, especially in remote areas, face economic, social, and environmental challenges that threaten their future sustainability. One avenue to enhance sustainability is to achieve energy self-sufficiency. The T'Sou-ke Nation on Vancouver Island, British Columbia is on the road to achieving this. In 2009, they successfully completed a Solar Community Project, which brought numerous benefits to the community and attracted the attention of other First Nations, including the remote First Nation of Skidegate in Haida Gwaii, British Columbia. Thereafter, Skidegate developed a unique partnership with T'Sou-ke Nation in 2010 in which T'Sou-ke became a solar mentor to Skidegate. My research evaluated whether this partnership was successful. I assessed the technical (applicability of the T'Sou-ke Solar Community Project to meet Skidegate's energy needs) and social (strength of the relationship) elements of success. Overall, the partnership was deemed highly successful by all parties. I also identified determinants of success that may be useful in creating other First Nations-to-First Nations partnerships for renewable energy development. --P. ii.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207