{"id":"W2739081369","doi":"10.1111/cobi.12958","title":"Defending the scientific integrity of conservation‐policy processes","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Conservation Biology","topic":"Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":32,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"Society for Conservation Biology; Wilburforce Foundation","keywords":"Transparency (behavior); Political science; Scientific integrity; Public relations; Uncertainty; Agency (philosophy); Government (linguistics); Politics; Scientific evidence; Publication; Business; Public administration; Engineering ethics; Law; Sociology; Engineering","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.001199554,0.0001411984,0.0001825398,0.00009523177,0.00145596,0.0001360693,0.0008698127,0.0001435174,0.0006324286],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008629508,0.0001115761,0.00004518723,0.0004610878,0.002749857,0.0004932324,0.0002947075,0.0001729146,0.0001332037],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001519918,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005011038,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003675051,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006996705,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985955,0.000172234,0.0004370107,0.0003873309,0.0001500087,0.0002579482],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99749,0.0006093404,0.0007403718,0.0008834349,0.000223697,0.00005311017],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001166457,0.00004568368,0.9692541,0.00001635803,0.0000102201,1.192315e-7,0.0003663821,0.000007237431,0.006030973,0.01051147,0.01270469,0.001041091],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000208192,0.00002955108,0.90382,0.00001321679,0.00001238117,0.000004840264,0.0001279952,0.0004510995,0.001697368,0.01346099,0.08006249,0.0001118664],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9209402,0.00003199264,0.0006499441,0.07432053,0.0007425772,0.0003607882,0.00001761141,0.00003827465,0.002898082],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9952158,0.00002130184,0.0009364104,0.002455136,0.0001100518,0.00007835527,0.00005424434,0.000009704454,0.00111898],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.07427562,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999641,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.06704416889307023,"score_gpt":0.3386051812516653,"score_spread":0.2715610123585951,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}