MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2596316566 · doi:10.2527/af.2011.0113

An introduction to Animal Frontiers: The uphill climb

2011· article· en· W2596316566 sur OpenAlex
Meghan Wulster-Radcliffe, Steven A Zinn

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnimal Frontiers · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésClimbBiologyAeronauticsEngineeringAerospace engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Some journeys are an uphill climb; thankfully, the view is usually worth it! Metaphorically speaking, conceiving and launching a new science magazine in less than 9 months falls into that category. Therefore, it is appropriate that the idea for an international collaboration to form Animal Frontiers was first voiced in the Mile High City, Denver, Colorado, and that solidifying the partnerships took us to Rome, Italy, where we climbed at least 10,000 stairs, and through the New England mountains into Canada during a blizzard. Several times a year, leaders from the American Society of Animal Science (ASAS), the Canadian Society of Animal Science (CSAS), and the European Federation of Animal Science (EAAP) meet to brainstorm, update, and attempt to increase our collaborative efforts to bring new services to our members. Before the 2010 Joint Annual Meeting in Denver, we had often discussed the negative worldwide image of animal agriculture and the roles of our individual scientific societies in combating that image. The questions that always come out of these discussions are “How can animal agriculture and animal science have such a negative image? Isn't our ultimate goal to feed the world?” The unique element of this discussion in July, 2010, was our rather obvious realization that we as animal science professionals do an amazing job of promoting the quality of science and advancement of animal science to ourselves, but we do very little to bring our message to a wider audience. We often discuss our desire to be the “scientific voice of animal science,” but to use an American vernacularism, we are “preaching to the choir.” So we decided it was time to leverage our best assets of great scientists, great science, and knowledge of scientific publishing and come up with a new information distribution plan. In the tradition of all great ideas, we decided to pay homage to a magazine called Elements that is currently published by a partnership of geological societies and poach their idea. The goal of Elements is to cover a single topic in geology from as many sides as possible, in a readable manner for a large and varied audience including individuals outside of geology. We pitched this idea to the ASAS board and to EAAP and CSAS during our joint discussions. All 3 societies quickly agreed in principle, and our journey began. To present details, to discuss ideas, and to organize the finances, individuals from ASAS (Steve Zinn, Meghan Wulster-Radcliffe) and the Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS; Susan Pollock) flew to Rome and then traveled to Canada to meet individually with their counterparts at EAAP and CSAS. In Rome, we had one of those amazing business meetings where all goals were accomplished, many new ideas were developed, and we managed to sneak in dinners with great food and a bit of sightseeing. We did some of our work at the EAAP offices and then some at Andrea Rosati's dining room table about an hour north of Rome. In Andrea's hometown, we were treated to a tour of an olive oil press and a home-cooked Italian meal at Cled Thomas' rebuilt home (of course, none of us were sure if Italian food cooked by a Scottish national could truly be considered authentic, but it was cooked with olive oil grown in Cled's olive grove and pressed at the local press). In Rome, we were able to establish a managerial board structure, a preliminary budget, an advertising sales plan, an editorial workflow, an operations agreement, and most importantly determine topics for the first 4 issues. In between all of this, we engaged in what we affectionately called speed sightseeing, and because it is Rome that invariably meant we climbed hundreds of steps for great views! We climbed steps in the Vatican, we climbed steps in the Coliseum, and of course we climbed the Spanish steps! If we hadn't had an amazingly productive series of meetings, we might have thought we were on vacation. We left Rome, tired but exhilarated and with final buy in from EAAP. Our next stop was to travel to Canada to meet with CSAS. Our visit with CSAS was just as productive as our visit with EAAP, but we would probably admit that it was harder to get to Canada than to Rome. We met in Hartford for a supposedly easy drive across the border, and we did make it across the border, but delayed flights, torrential rain, a forgotten passport, and finally a blizzard certainly added to the excitement. But in a short time, we were able to get final buy-in from CSAS, 2 more ideas for future issues, formalization of the editorial process, and final approval of the budget. All of the travel done, and the decision that FASS would help ASAS, CSAS, and EAAP begin a new publication within 9 months, definitely record time, we got back to our offices and started working. Nine months later, we have our first issue on the carbon cycle. It has been a hectic and scary 9 months. We have rewritten the rules on how to get an article through the editorial process 3 times, and we have come close to driving our authors, technical editors, and cover artist over the edge with tight, and then even tighter, time frames. And we have worked hard to find new and creative ways to fund a new publication in a time when the publications world has been turned upside down. Definitely an up-hill climb, but we think the view is worth it. Enjoy!

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,336
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,208
Écart entre enseignants0,195 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle