Bibliographic record
Abstract
The struggle to determine the pace and nature of resource development has long been at the centre of northern autonomy movements. The fortyyear-long debate over the Kemano Power Project in Northern British Columbia reveals how the understanding of hydro-development has shifted from a major regional benefit to a more complicated and conflicted view in which environmental and indigenous concerns are balanced against economic opportunities. When built in the 1950s, Kemano was seen as the foundation for a stable and prosperous industrial economy. The planned expansion of the hydro-electric system in the 1980s and 1990s touched off a major debate inside and outside the region. The region wrestled with the difficult choices presented by such major projects but the decision to cancel the Kemano Completion Project (KCP) rested on the provincial government’s reaction to southern pressures. Kemano, as with many major resource projects in northern regions, reveals the degree to which external political and commercial forces continue to determine northern development and therefore the very future of the region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".