MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096328112

REVIEW COMMENTS

2007· article· en· W7096328112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateConventionSection (typography)Environmental impact statementSubmarine pipelineEnvironmental impact assessmentDrilling
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As requested in your letter of March 31, 2008, Environment Canada has reviewed the environmental assessment of the above noted drilling program offshore Newfoundland in the Jeanne D’Arc Basin. Based on the information provided, it is understood that the proponent proposes to drill up to 27 exploration and appraisal/delineation wells during the period 2008-2016. The following EC comments stem from the department’s mandate under the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA) and Section 36 of the Fisheries Act. Pertinent EC expertise, and related comments, also originate with the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), the Canadian

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.148
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.148
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0140.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1690.214

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207