File Reference: Coal and Oil Sands Exploration Reclamation Requirements Purpose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This directive provides information and guidance to Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD) staff, the coal exploration program (CEP), and oil sands exploration (OSE) Industry on the process used to verify successful reclamation of CEP and OSE dispositions and obtain reclamation certification. Context Reclamation criteria have been developed with an understanding that post-reclamation land use will be similar to pre-disturbance conditions. Successful reclamation of forested landscapes will involve the establishment of native vegetation representative of the disturbed ecosite(s). Successful reclamation of peatland and/or native grassland will involve the re-establishment of site conditions and vegetation species indicative of the anticipated land use. These criteria assess the development of the site along the trajectory towards the target community. To properly assess the effectiveness of reclamation practices on exploration sites three different criteria need to be evaluated. These criteria include landscape, vegetation and soils. Landscape and vegetation must be assessed on all sites and site access roads, but soil assessment is only required on sites where surface and/or soil disturbance has occurred. In addition to ground-truthing all soil-disturbed sites (i.e., soils stripped, compacted, rutted or other soil structure alterations), ten per cent (10%) of the remaining sites within the exploration program must be ground-truthed to verify aerial assessment. It is also important that when sites are assessed for reclamation, the assessor should give attention to access roads as these may have suffered more damage than the exploration site itself.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.454 | 0.266 |
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".