MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415586859 · doi:10.21083/crrf.v34i1.7789

Navigating Challenge and Change - The State of Rural Ontario

2025· article· W4415586859 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan Gibson, S. Ashleigh Weeden, Renee Goretsky, Sara Epp, Sheri Longboat

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)Psychological resilienceCorporate governanceFace (sociological concept)Rural areaPsychological interventionCommunity resilienceRural communityNarrative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated many challenges, changes, and opportunities for rural Ontario. It emphasized the significance of major trends and issues for rural Ontario, such as the critical nature of infrastructure, the vulnerabilities presented by increasingly tourism-dependent economies, the barriers rural people face in accessing critical health and social services, and accelerated changes to rural demographics and workforces. This poster showcases two resilience cases from rural Ontario: to Indigenize water governance by the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation and re-localization of food systems in northern Ontario. The cases offer insights into the ways different communities are navigating challenges and change, and they share lessons for interrupting the dominant narratives about rural contexts through building local capacity to exercise community agency. In both cases, specific interventions based on community values, needs, goals, and aspirations serve to reclaim control from urban or outside powers, and re-embed both resources and decision-making processes in the hands of the people and places most affected by challenges, changes, and increasingly uncertain futures.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Rural Revitalization FoundationSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207