MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296081787 · doi:10.25071/2292-4736/40377

Operationalizing the State

2006· article· en· W4296081787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Tough

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderCurrents Journal of Critical Environmental Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlooding (psychology)Flood mythNatural disasterGeographyStormEmergency responseHydroelectricityWinter stormSoftware deploymentClimate changeEnvironmental protectionEngineeringMeteorologyArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, Canadians have seen our armed forces increasingly deployed in response to environmental disasters. In 1996, the Saguenay River in eastern Quebec flooded, destroying homes in the region and bursting hydroelectric dams. In 1996 the Red River overflowed its banks, flooding large areas of central Manitoba; the largest Canadian military force deployed since the Korean War (8400 personnel) was sent in to contain the flood and deliver emergency supplies under Operation Assistance. In response to the Ice Storm in 1998, which left millions of Canadians in Quebec and eastern Ontario without power, the Department of National Defence launched Operation Recuperation, which it called “the largest deployment of troops ever to serve on Canadian soil in response to a natural disaster” (www.forcesgc.ca/site/operations/recuperation_e.asp). Climate change and the growing incidence of extreme weather mean we have most likely not seen the last of this new humanitarian role for the military.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderCurrents Journal of Critical Environmental StudiesSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207