MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Global Combat Ship Programmes (Type 26 Frigate, Hunter Class Frigate, Canadian Surface Combatant)

2020· article· en· W6888946640 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)ShipbuildingGloomLimitingFront (military)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Royal Navy, Royal Australian Navy, and Royal Canadian Navy have a long history of mutual respect and cooperation, in war and peace. Opportunities to enhance this cooperation and interoperability have significantly increased following the decisions by the governments of Australia and Canada to base their next surface combatants on the Type 26 frigate under construction for the Royal Navy. In June 2018, Australia announced the selection of the Type 26 design as the basis for the SEA5000 programme to deliver nine frigates for the Royal Australian Navy. In February 2019, the government of Canada and Irving Shipbuilding Inc. announced that they had selected Lockheed Martin Canada for the design of the Canadian Surface Combatant ship that will be based on the BAE Systems Type 26 Global Combat Ship design. Fifteen Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) ships are planned to be built at Irving Shipbuilding’s Halifax Shipyard.\nCollectively, there is now a 32-ship programme, constituting three national endeavours involving significant government commitment, and large-scale investment and development, to enable continuous shipbuilding activity. The United Kingdom, Australia and Canada have formed a Global Combat Ship (GCS) User Group to advance cooperation and shared learning. The member navies are proud to be part of a collaborative programme that will deliver world-class multi-threat naval surface combatant capability, tailored to each country’s specific requirements, as part of our respective warfighting and shipbuilding strategies.\nThis paper will present the background to each national programme, identifying the strategic commitments that each government has made for their shipbuilding endeavour. It will then look at the role of the GCS User Group and how it will support each of the respective programmes and their country’s security and resilience. The paper will reveal the goals and opportunities derived from a more collaborative approach, leading to increased interoperability between our respective navies; maintaining capability superiority through an agile and innovative relationship with acquisition, science and technology organisations and partner nations; and assisting our shipbuilding industries in delivering capability, on time and budget, against evolving threats.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1390.035

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicEuropean and Russian Geopolitical Military StrategiesFrench-language works237,207