MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388990961 · doi:10.21810/jicw.v6i2.6255

Deep Space and Arctic Security Issues

2023· article· en· W4388990961 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Hema Nadarajah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Intelligence Conflict and Warfare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsArcticThe arcticFoundation (evidence)Space (punctuation)Political scienceKey (lock)GeographyNational securityComputer securityOceanographyComputer scienceLawGeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On September 21, 2023, Dr. Hema Nadarajah from the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada led the monthly digital roundtable for the Canadian Association for Security and Intelligence Studies Vancouver. Dr. Nadarajah identified geopolitical views and key actors relating to the Arctic and Deep Space, examined Canada's own role, and emphasized that the regions are not isolated entities.

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 score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

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 studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Intelligence Conflict and WarfareSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207