MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922287948 · doi:10.11575/prism/34995

Proposed Target-setting Process for the CRP Regional EcoPlan

2017· other· en· W6922287948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101LiquationDysgeusiaDiafiltrationFusible alloyHyporeflexiaProteogenomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of the Calgary Regional Partnership Ecological Conservation and Protection Plan (or CRP Regional EcoPlan) began in the spring of 2015. The purpose of the EcoPlan was to create an “implementation” plan for the Calgary Metropolitan Plan’s (CMP’s) first principle: Protecting the natural environment and watershed. High-level goals for this were articulated in the CMP, but the EcoPlan was conceived to be a practical, measurable plan for the on-going protection of the ecological features and functions on which the citizens of the Calgary Region depend for their physical, economic and social well-being.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0160.006
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.013

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicHistory of Computing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207