MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255840354 · doi:10.1109/wsc.2012.6465100

Modeling of Canadian Forces' northern operations and their staging

2012· article· en· W4255840354 on OpenAlex
Jean-Denis Caron, Yvan Gauthier, Ahmed Ghanmi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings Title: Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDozenComputer scienceOperations researchContingency planArcticPosition (finance)ContingencyThe arcticDecision support systemEngineeringBusinessComputer securityData miningGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes modeling and simulation (M&S) performed to assist the Canadian Forces (CF) in determining their requirements for northern operations hubs. Northern operations hubs are locations that the CF may use as staging bases for operating in the Canadian Arctic and where they may decide to maintain certain operational support capabilities, including the ability to pre-position any equipment required by contingency plans. M&S provided insights into the number of hubs required to enable timely deployments to Canada's North. Multi-criteria decision analysis was then used to identify their most advantageous locations. The analysis considered a dozen criteria related to CF operational employment and support, many of which were assessed through M&S.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.243 · 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