MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096968588

Responses to Questions Raised from Peer Review of Canada’s Sixth National Report for the Convention on Nuclear Safety Sixth Review Meeting

2014· article· en· W7096968588 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermissionCommissionConventionRedistribution (election)LegislationPeer review
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

© Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) 2013 PWGSC catalogue number CC172-18/2013E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-22611-8 Extracts from this document may be reproduced for individual use without permission provided the source is fully acknowledged. However, reproduction in whole or in part for purposes of resale or redistribution requires prior written permission from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.255
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.255
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.007
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0360.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.011

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207