MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385279422 · doi:10.26792/rbed.v8n1.2021.75214

An Analysis of the Canadian Military-Naval Industry in the Period 2010-2018

2021· article· en· W4385279422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jéssica Pires Barbosa Barreto, Thauan Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Estudos de Defesa · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacetimeNavyShipbuildingMilestoneGovernment (linguistics)Investment (military)State (computer science)Operations researchPeriod (music)Identification (biology)Defense industryEngineeringPolitical scienceEconomyAeronauticsEconomicsLawGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian military naval industry has historically suffered from cycles of high investment during periods of conflict and cuts in peacetime. After years of scrapping, the government turned to the sector through the initiative of the National Shipbuilding Strategy (2010), which is an ambitious attempt to modernize the navy. Taking this scenario into account, the main purpose of this paper is to understand the role of the State as a promoter of the interactions between the relevant actors and the rules of this industry. To do so, the analysis will be based on the Structure-Conduct-Performance (SCP) paradigm, allowing a better understanding of the dynamics of the industry and a clearer identification of its important variables. Setting up a case study, this research uses official data, documents, reports and academic papers. the time frame covers the period 2010-2018, due to the launch of the Canadian shipbuilding strategy, which is a milestone for the revitalization and operation of the Canadian naval industry. This policy changed the components of the country’s military naval industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Estudos de DefesaSame topicDefense, Military, and Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207