Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The environmental science community mourns the loss of a truly remarkable and passionate environmental scientist and beloved father and husband. Peter Michael Chapman left us far too early on 26 September 2017 at his home in North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Throughout his environmental science and consulting career, Peter never slowed down. He dedicated his career at top speed to questioning the status quo, proposing unique solutions, and spearheading research in the field of environmental science. He was a prolific writer and editor; his contributions included hundreds of scientific articles and book chapters, as well as leadership at countless technical meetings. He delivered engaging keynote talks worldwide that purposely challenged his audiences. He encouraged and mentored young scientists with enthusiasm. He inspired and supported colleagues and peers around the world with his incredible work ethic, his energy, and his tremendous vigor. Peter was born in 1951 in Hull, England, but spent a large portion of his childhood in Cuba (where he became fluent in Spanish), and later in the Philippines and South Florida, USA. Peter eventually found himself in the city of Victoria, Canada, where he earned his PhD in 1979 in benthic ecology with an emphasis on ecotoxicology and risk assessment at the University of Victoria. Although he retained his British citizenship, Peter was proud to be a Canadian and would often remark, “The world needs more Canada.” He was passionate about British Columbia, and made it his home for the rest of his life. His environmental consulting career began at EVS Environment Consultants in nearby Vancouver, where he became a partner. EVS was one of the earliest science-focused environmental consulting companies in North America and an influential part of the early careers of many successful environment professionals, leading to the formation of multiple ecology and risk consulting companies thereafter. Twenty-five years later, EVS merged with Golder Associates, where Peter would work another 10 years as a principal before retiring to his independent consulting practice in 2014. At the core of Peter's work was a fundamental faith in science. He challenged scientific information constantly throughout his career. He also challenged those who would rely, often blindly, on science for decision making, urging them to adhere faithfully to principles fundamental to the scientific method: observe, measure, verify, and improve. Peter abhorred bias of any sort. His strong conviction that bridges were needed between science and problem-solving in society was instrumental in shaping the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry's (SETAC) second peer-reviewed publication, IEAM, in 2004. The journal—so much like Peter—is dedicated to bridging the gap between scientific research and the use of science for management of the environment. Peter will be remembered as a stalwart supporter of SETAC, and a moving force behind the SETAC student mentor program and the SETAC Student/Mentor dinner event at each annual meeting. Peter's passion for scientific discourse inspired the “Learned Discourse” feature in the Society's early member newsletter, and later in the IEAM journal; he edited the content continuously for 30 years. He was recognized for these and other contributions to the Society with the SETAC Founder's Award in 2001. He was named a SETAC Fellow in 2013. When I congratulated him on his Founders Award, Peter remarked that he considered the recognition—outside of his family—to be among his most treasured honors. Peter viewed his role as a SETAC Fellow as an obligation: an obligation to get the science right; to be honest, truthful, and fair; to share one's knowledge; and to have respect for the environment and everyone and everything with whom we share it. “Everyone,” Peter often noted, “has the potential and obligation to leave the world a better place than it was when they arrived.” Peter will be remembered as an expert and leader in the field of ecological risk assessment and benthic ecology. He introduced the scientific and regulatory communities to methods for assessment of sediment quality that remain the state of the practice around the world. With Ed Long, Peter pioneered the “Sediment Quality Triad,” internationally recognized to this day as a sound approach for evaluation of sediment quality in streams, rivers, and oceans. Peter was an equally powerful advocate for expanding Triad concepts into weight-of-evidence approaches for all aspects of ecological risk assessment. He was a key contributor to the development of the science of evaluating the fate and effects of contaminants in sediment. He encouraged new paradigms for environmental monitoring and assessment and for the development and use of quantitative tools for data analysis, and he had an early appreciation of the significance of climate change on ecosystems. Peter lived a full life. I dare to say as we look back on Peter's 66 years and the many adventures and honors that he enjoyed, few of us will achieve as much if we lived to 100. He was a leader, scholar, researcher, author, editor, educator, mentor, lecturer, entrepreneur, consultant, and of course to many of us, a valued colleague and dear friend. Peter moved among these roles with such élan. I suspect he would be happy with the moniker, “Peter Chapman: citizen of the world, husband, father, and scientist.” I am left with a memory of Peter's infectious smile and that impish glint in his eye. It was the look of a gifted and wise person extoling the rest of us to move onward, always learning, and so we will. Peter will be greatly missed. In honor of his devotion to the scientific and academic communities, an endowment has been created in Peter's name at SETAC. Contributions to the Peter Chapman Endowment Fund can be made online (https://www.setac.org/donations/fund.asp?id=16239). Thanks to Peter's many colleagues for their review and input, with special gratitude to Keith Solomon, Beth Power, and Blair McDonald. John P Giesy Professor, Canada Research Chair in Environmental Toxicology Department of Veterinary Biomedical Sciences and Toxicology Centre University of Saskatchewan, Canada
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».