The use and value of urban geology in Canada: A case study in the National Capital Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to a request to increase its activities in environmental geology and to collaborate with the provinces, the GSC initiated a project in 1993 to provide geoscience information for urban and regional planning and development in eastern Ontario and western Québec. Prior to the launch of the project, representatives from various levels of government, private consultants, environmentalists, universities and the general public were invited to discuss the need for and usefulness of urban geological information at a forum. The participants confirmed the importance of urban geological information and supported a coordinating role for the GSC. Following this forum Natural Resources Canada's Audit and Evaluation Branch undertook an impact study which examined the usefulness and value of benefits of basic types of geoscience information in urban and regional planning and development. The evaluation study of the National Capital Region Project determined that the geoscience documents are used extensively and provide an authoritative standard for work. They are particularly useful in preliminary project planning, geotechnical engineering for major facilities, environmental impact assessments, public safety planning, and as a multi-disciplinary research tool and field guide. The estimated value of benefits include a 5%-20% reduction in cost of civil/environmental engineering design and planning study work, and considerable monetary savings in derived or indirect benefits amounting to annual savings of several million dollars. Recent technological advances increase the possible range of applications especially for those who have traditionally been users of geological maps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".