Bibliographic record
Abstract
This procedure provides guidance to BES applicants on the Ontario-adapted NERC BES Exception procedure. Public Disclaimer The posting of documents on this Web site is done for the convenience of market participants and other interested visitors to the IESO Web site. Please be advised that, while the IESO attempts to have all posted documents conform to the original, changes can result from the original, including changes resulting from the programs used to format the documents for posting on the Web site, as well as from the programs used by the viewer to download and read the documents. The IESO makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, that the documents on this Web site are exact reproductions of the original documents listed. In addition, the documents and information posted on this Web site are subject to change. The IESO may revise, withdraw, or make final these materials at any time at its sole discretion, without further notice. It is solely your responsibility to ensure that you are using up-to-date documents and information. This document may contain a summary of a particular market rule. Where provided, the summary has
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".