MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096685620

SUMMARY

2010· article· en· W7096685620 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)OfficerPublic healthEmergency managementElement (criminal law)Compliance (psychology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this report is to recommend that City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into Mutual Aid Agreements (MAA) with Boards of Health to provide for public health mutual aid and assistance during emergencies. A recent request to enter into a MAA has been made by the Medical Officer of Health for the Simcoe-Muskoka Board of Health. The City of Toronto has an emergency management program spanning the broad scope of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery activities, in compliance with the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. An important element of preparedness and response is to make arrangements that will ensure adequate assistance in the form of qualified personnel, services, equipment, or materials to initiate and sustain an effective emergency response. The Ontario Public Health Standards also encourage the use of formal Mutual Aid Agreements to enhance capacity that may be needed by Boards of Health. Such MAAs would allow for requests for assistance, the ability to accept offers to provide assistance or providing assistance to others based on the contents of the agreement, particularly as a way to mitigate capacity issues related to the need for credentialed and specialized staff skills during an emergency. The health and well-being of a community is best protected through the concerted efforts of multiple public health agencies providing assistance to one another when in need.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.388 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207