Bibliographic record
Abstract
Number: P:\\2007\\Internal Services\\Cf\\ec07024Cf – et (AFS #3419) SUMMARY This report presents a review of current practices and rate structures respecting the water and wastewater program, and an analysis of a number of options to provide for a new water rate structure that is fairer, transparent and conducive to improving the City’s industrial and manufacturing base. The current seven-block volume based rate structure, a product of amalgamation, is complex, benefits few consumers without any real focus, and results in similar consumers paying different rates. A comparison of the water and wastewater rates and rate structures of the surrounding municipalities and other major cities showed water and wastewater costs to be generally lower in Toronto for residential customers. However, such is not the case for large-volume users, where this difference becomes more evident at higher consumptions. The City’s larger industrial employers would find costs to be as much as 20%-25 % lower in Peel, Durham, Vaughan and Hamilton, and 35 % lower in London, Ontario.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".