MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393852293 · doi:10.25071/q5wh1w82

Emergency Management Think Tank Report June 7, 2023

2023· article· en· W4393852293 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergency management is a complex, ever-evolving profession. Emergency management practitioners and stakeholders from the public, private, and non-profit sectors have a unique professional obligation and moral responsibility to both set and stay well ahead of emerging trends. In recognition of this responsibility and the evolving post-pandemic landscape, The Canadian Journal of Emergency Management (CJEM), Public Safety Canada, and Emergency Management Logistics Canada (EMLC) hosted a Think Tank under Chatham House rules on June 7th, 2023 with participants from coast to coast and across the private sector, academia, the Government of Canada, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The purpose of this Think Tank was to bring together individuals with diverse experiences and points of view to discuss and explore the future of emergency management (EM) in the Canadian context. CJEM and EMLC’s 2023 Think Tank was conducted in a conference space provided by Public Safety Canada in Ottawa, Ontario, and fostered an environment of open and candid discussions.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient 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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.314 · 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