MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014393487

Pollution Of Boundary Waters

2005· report· en· W7014393487 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary, Museums and Press - UDSpace (University of Delaware) · 2005
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionBoundary (topology)TreatyJoint (building)Government (linguistics)HonorState (computer science)Pollution
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Secretary of State for the Government of the United States and the Secretary of State for \nExternal Affairs for the Government of Canada on April I, 1946, made the following Reference to the \nInternational Joint Commission through identical letters addressed to the United States and Canadian \nsections of the Commission. \n“I have the honor to advise you that the Governments of the United States and Canada \nhave been informed that the waters of the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair and the Detroit River \nare being polluted by sewage and industrial wastes emptied into those waters. Having in mind \nthe provisions of Article IV of the Boundary Waters Treaty signed January 11, 1909, that \nboundary waters and waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side \nto the injury of health or property on the other side, the two Governments have agreed upon \na joint Reference on the matter to the International Joint Commission, pursuant to the provisions \nof Article IX of said Treaty. The Commission is requested to inquire into and report \nto the two Governments upon the following questions: \n(1) Are the waters referred to in the preceding paragraph, or any of them, actually being \npolluted on either side of the boundary to the injury of health or property on the \nother side of the boundary? \n(2) If the foregoing question is answered in the affirmative, to what extent, by what \ncauses, and in what localities is such pollution taking place? \n(3) If the Commission should find that pollution of the character just referred to is taking \nplace, what measures for remedying the situation would, in its judgment, be most \npracticable from the economic, sanitary and other points of view? \n(4) If the Commission should find that the construction or maintenance of remedial or \npreventive works is necessary to render the waters sanitary and suitable for domestic \nand other uses, it should indicate the nature, location and extent of such works, and \nthe probable cost thereof, and by whom and in what proportions such cost should be \nborne.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary, Museums and Press - UDSpace (University of Delaware)French-language works237,207