Reflections on Connecting Canada's Climate Policy Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book represents an initial step to mapping the layers of Canadian climate policy activities across government, industry, and civil society. Its guiding presumption is that such mapping will help align efforts to decarbonize. A consensus point among all authors is that new alliances need to be forged, and old ones need to be refreshed, strengthened, and broadened. Such allyship will prove essential to supporting efforts to combat climate change, galvanizing and prioritizing support for the global transition to carbon-neutrality. When climate change actors can find ways to better coordinate, they will build the sort of networked institutional thickness that can effect directed change while standing as a formidable fail-safe to policy backslide when tough choices require commitment. Our book offers direction toward such institutional thickness within climate governance, a thickness that can ensure that meaningful decarbonization occurs. It does so by offering a glimpse into how policy actors, including self-empowered individuals, can protect tomorrow from the perils of the present. [From Reflections on Connecting Canada's Climate Policy Network - Canada Climate Law Initiative]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.045 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".