MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385855429 · doi:10.59962/9780774850124-002

Preface

2007· book-chapter· en· W4385855429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this book we pursue an elusive, yet persistent, area of public policy in which Canadian planners have been practising and excelling for six decades.In rural and urban regions alike, this country's regional planning has been both innovative and diverse, tackling, among other problems, urban sprawl, regional economic disparities, and environmental conservation.Canadian regional planning has not always been effective nor has it always had the political support required to carry out its mandate.Yet, inconstant as its unfolding has been, regional planning has emerged time and again in Canada as the best perspective from which to approach extra-municipal problems as well as subprovincial and subnational dilemmas.Regional planning in Canada has evolved over the years in response to new spatial situations that now confront us, such as the emerging city-regions and the demand for sustainable development.Regional planning has been "irrepressible" in Canada, just as a British colleague, Urlan Wannop, found it to be in Europe.Only a few countries have more experience with regional planning than does Canada, and these only by little more than a decade.Despite its persistence, regional planning experience in Canada has never been collated, much less evaluated.This field, in which both of us have practised and taught for most of our professional lives, needs to be examined, its essentials identified, and its directions (both past and present) illuminated, not least because of new cultural and political challenges already facing nations, regions, and communities.This is the task we set for ourselves.Such a task, almost by definition, required more than our own personal resources and knowledge, and we want to acknowledge those who, often inadvertently and sometimes more extensively than they had anticipated, joined us in this task.They have enriched its outcome.We were helped immensely by regional planners across the country: Hugh Kellas of the Greater Vancouver Regional District, Richard Scott of the National Capital Commission in Ottawa,

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4160.250

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.169 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→