MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017983894

Climage change: We are at risk - Final report

2003· report· en· W7017983894 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2003
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)AgricultureApprehensionClimate changeRural areaEcotourism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From November 2002 to May 2003, the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Forestry examined the effects of climate change on Canada’s agricultural and forestry sectors and rural communities. This study is a direct result of the Committee’s previous study, Canadian Farmers at Risk.1 As part of that study, the Committee travelled to the Maritimes to hear from farmers about their concerns. Farmers repeatedly expressed apprehension about changes in climate and were unsure as to how they could cope with - or adapt to - apparently new climate scenarios. After identifying the leading researchers in the field of climate change and adaptation in Canada and abroad, the Committee heard from witnesses at the forefront in this area from universities, research centres, and governments across Canada as well as internationally. The Committee took a country-wide approach and actively sought the views of farmer organizations, rural associations, ecotourism groups, and environmental and conservation organizations from all regions of Canada. The Committee held hearings in Ottawa and travelled to Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia (see the Appendix for a complete list of witnesses). Throughout the hearings, the Committee was especially interested in learning about effective adaptation strategies for Canadians. Farmers, forest operators and rural communities are already facing and adapting to a wide range of risks and opportunities that arise from changes in market conditions, domestic regulations, trade policies, technology, and other factors. This study thus extends the work presented in the Committee’s last report, Canadian Farmers at Risk, which examined short- and long-term issues affecting the health of Canada’s agricultural and agri-food industry. The Committee tabled an interim report in June 2003. The Committee then returned to the same witnesses and invited them to propose relevant and realistic recommendations that could help Canadians in rural areas and also, where applicable, in urban areas to adapt to climate change. This report expresses the views and concerns of the various witnesses, and provide specific recommendations to help ensure that Canada successfully responds and adapts to climate change, thereby assuring the continued prosperity of our agriculture and forestry sectors and our rural communities.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.173 · 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