MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7052316665

Review of "Deep Waters: Courage, Character, and the Lake Timiskaming Canoeing Tragedy"

2000· review· en· W7052316665 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildernessBachelorTRIPS architectureInquestTragedy (event)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Waters: Courage, Character, and the Lake Timiskaming Canoeing Tragedy by James Raffan isn't easy to read.It chronicles a Canadian wilderness disaster offering preventative lessons, for those willing to learn.On Sunday June 11, 1978, twenty-seven boys, aged eleven to thirteen, and four leaders, started from Timiskaming, Quebec heading north for James Bay.It was to be a tough three weeks intended to transform boys into men.They paddled four brand-new, twenty-two foot canoes.A gentle tailwind helped in the morning, but by dark, all four canoes were swamped.Twelve boys and one leader were dead from hypothermia.The following day, the survivors were rescued.A coroner's inquest ruled the deaths accidental.Raffan is the right person to re-examine this event.He spent his boyhood summers at camps in northern Ontario, learning to swim, canoe, camp and eventually to lead trips in the Canadian wilderness.He knows the theory and practice of education.He has both a Bachelor of Science and a Bachelor of Education.He taught high school, and then he completed a PhD.He instructed at the Queen's University Faculty of Education Outdoor Education Program for eighteen years.Now, he writes about what he learned and what he taught while taking young people on wilderness trips.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207