MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385862325 · doi:10.59962/9780774856591-fm

Front Matter

2007· paratext· en· W4385862325 on OpenAlexaffabout
Russell Uhl, David G. Haglund, Donald McRae, Gordon R. Munro, Russell Uhler

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2007
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsGlobal Affairs CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront (military)GeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest products constitute one of the most important categories of trade between Canada and the United States. This book illuminates the major economic and political factors that have led to a particular pattern of trade in forest products; and it examines and compares the legal structures within which this trade takes place. Standard economic and political methods of analysis are used to study the history of this trade, including such recent developments as the negotiated Free Trade Agreement. Several of the chapters focus on two recent trade disputes involving Canadian exports of shakes and shingles and of softwood lumber to the United States. In addition, the authors consider the issue of timber subsidies, factors affecting foreign market share, and the burden of tariffs and export taxes. It is a useful and timely book that sheds light on some of the fundamental issues affecting trade between Canada and the United States, both now and in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9130.884

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooksSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207