The Coalition of the Capable: The Case for Cross-functional Collaboration in Marine Defence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If you are reading this, then you have probably spent a good deal of time on the deck of a boat. As anyone who has spent any time at sea understands, things can change – quickly. What are calm waters on the outset of the voyage can suddenly rise and become unpredictable from one moment to the next. It has recently become clear that the same holds true for certain geopolitical alliances. Canadian maritime defence operations, which traditionally benefited from trusted allies and foreign resources, are now facing isolationist attitudes and unpredictable, more costly supply chains. However, these challenges are now inspiring national defence policy-makers to pay more attention to the capabilities in our own backyard, offering a golden opportunity for regional marine technology companies to work towards a common goal.
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 | 0.027 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.036 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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.
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".