MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W998360745

Cooperative information systems : a tool for supporting Alberta’s Land-use Framework

2010· article· en· W998360745 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

VenueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation systemLand useEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningComputer scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringCivil engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access to land has become a limiting factor for developments in Alberta. This has led the Government of Alberta to introduce the Land-use Framework (Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, 2008) as a way to improve land-use decision making. Cumulative effects management and the establishment of information and knowledge systems are key components of the framework. With the use of cooperative information systems to combine ecological databases, individual environmental site assessments can be used to build local and regional environmental assessments. This allows for the identification of broader issues that can be missed in individual assessments. As well, local and regional environmental assessments can be developed and reviewed in a timely and effective manner, and government, resource industries, and other stakeholders can be provided with more comprehensive information for decision-making.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

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 communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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