MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410294079 · doi:10.46887/ntgs5009126997

Northwest Territories Geological Survey Permafrost Science Team Strategic Plan (2021-2024)

2021· report· en· W4410294079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostPlan (archaeology)Geological surveyGeographyStrategic planningEarth scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeologyArchaeologyEnvironmental scienceManagementPaleontologyEconomicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past several years, despite limited capacity, the Northwest Territories Geological Survey (NTGS) has increasingly been looked to as a source of permafrost knowledge by the Government of Northwest Territories (GNWT) and others in the broader permafrost community. The NTGS has recently added three new positions to create a Permafrost Science Team. At present, the NTGS Permafrost Science Team consists of four positions: a Senior Permafrost Scientist, a Permafrost Scientist, a Permafrost Data Scientist, and a Permafrost Geohazard Scientist. The NTGS Permafrost Science Team has developed its first strategic plan to anticipate increased interest in and need for permafrost science and expertise. This plan is intended to clarify the purpose and focus of the NTGS Permafrost Science Team, and to provide a planning framework for GNWT permafrost science collaborators and external collaborators and partners. This strategic plan will help the staff work with collaborators and partners and engage with clients more effectively, and prioritise their work on an ongoing basis. It will also help the leadership of NTGS and partnering organisations support the success of this growing team. The plan is meant to be interpreted within the broader NTGS planning framework and is expected to evolve.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.028

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and Exploration→French-language works237,207→