MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396665370 · doi:10.32920/25758117.v1

Outcome of an academic collaboration between Defence Scientists of the radiological and nuclear technology group at Defence Research and Development Canada – Suffield Research Centre and Toronto Metropolitan University

2024· preprint· en· W4396665370 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Helen Moise, Ana Pejović‐Milić

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNuclear Issues and Defense
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersConnaught FundUniversity of TorontoDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsMetropolitan areaRadiological weaponOutcome (game theory)Research centrePolitical scienceDefence industryEngineeringLibrary scienceAeronauticsMedicineGeographyArchaeologyComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>In Canada, defence security sciences are typically taught within specialized programs and institutions, such as the Royal Military College of Canada, and as such, graduates from programs outside these specializations tend to be unfamiliar with the world of defence science, its applicability and relevancy to their program. Such limitation was observed in an academic collaboration between defence scientists of the Radiological and Nuclear Technology group at Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) – Suffield Research Centre and the Physics department of Toronto Metropolitan University in Ontario (formerly called Ryerson University). The collaboration, which took place during the Winter 2021 semester involved the contribution of course material by DRDC – Suffield Research Centre defence scientists, Dr. Anna Rae Green and Dr. Helen Moise to the Physics graduate level course titled, “Radiation Protection and Dosimetry,” which is led and taught by course professor and Physics department chair, Dr. Ana Pejović-Milić. The outcome of this collaboration was a first for all parties involved and proved to be successful allowing students to utilize their knowledge to the challenging field of defence science—an opportunity that they have very likely never received as part of the regular science stream.</p>

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Issues and DefenseFrench-language works237,207