MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7064460255

An assessment of the vulnerability of Tuktoyaktuk to environmental and socio-economic changes

2008· dissertation· en· W7064460255 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaIndigenous and Northern Affairs CanadaArcticNetAurora Research InstituteFisheries Joint Management Committee
KeywordsClimate changeVulnerability (computing)LivelihoodContext (archaeology)Adaptive capacityPsychological resilienceNatural disasterFood securityResilience (materials science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis assessed the ways that the Inuvialuit community of Tuktoyaktuk is vulnerable to climate change in the context of ongoing socio-economic and environmental changes. Stresses to livelihoods are occurring due to changes in demand for sport hunting and tourism, health issues, and limited availability of employment opportunities. Aspects of food security are stressed due to changes in the abundance and distribution of wildlife, the amount of time that Tuktoyaktuk residents spend harvesting, and the high cost of store-bought foods. Infrastructure is also at risk due to coastal erosion, flooding, and permafrost degradation. Existing adaptations have not taken the form of planned actions in response to specific changes in climate. In light of projected intensification of climate change and a proposed natural gas pipeline in the Tuktoyaktuk area, the community will experience new stresses and changes in adaptive capacity in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207