MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7098313064

1 Immigration and Settlement in Greater Sudbury

2015· article· en· W7098313064 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)ImmigrationPopulationGeorgianHuman settlementRidge
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudbury is located in the Canadian Shield and north of Georgian Bay. It is 483 km west of Ottawa, 390 km north of Toronto and 290 km east of Sault Ste Marie. It is a typical northern city with long cold winters and an average temperature of minus 13°C in January. Summers are generally hot and dry or humid and warm with average temperatures of 18°C. Spring and fall are short lived. History Sudbury emerged as a railway post in 1883 during the construction of the transnational rail line. Describing the history of development in Sudbury, Wallace (1993a) states that initially it was intended to be a temporary camp for railway workers and a permanent settlement in this area was beyond imagination because the terrain was “dominated by gigantic rock outcrops interspersed with extensive swamps and endless lakes ” (p. 13). With about 3,350 workers Sudbury became the major construction site and a company town (Krats, cited in Wallace 1993a, 14). The discovery of rich mineral deposits, particularly nickel and copper, in this area paved the way for a city with sustained development. Many mining companies acquired land and started their operations in the mid and late 1880s and the population started increasing gradually.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Green Space and Health→French-language works237,207→