MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097836925

These comments are provided after review of the Discussion Papers and after having participated

2010· article· en· W7097836925 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Sustainable Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirectiveScope (computer science)Christian ministryStakeholderTerminologyRenewable energy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The comments are provided in one integrated document, due to the close relationship between the discussion papers. Where applicable attached reference documents are provided which provide supplemental information. At times comments will refer to the discussion presented at the Stakeholder Dialogue / Consultation Workshop where relevant, and where these comments might influence the final papers. Some of the comments go beyond the content of the Discussion Papers and relate to the Minister of Energy’s Directive to the OPA, as a copy of these comments will also be routed to the Minister. Summary Comments: The Minister of Energy’s Directive has severely limited the scope of the energy professionals at OPA to identify an integrated supply that is optimal for Ontario. The Ministry directive calls for the IPSP to:- Increase the installed capacity of new renewable resources by 2,700 MW from the 2003 base by 2010, and increase the total capacity of renewable sources to 15,700 MW (from

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.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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)0.0060.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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