MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523308299

A Study of the Impact of the Wetlands Easement Program on Agricultural Land Valuest

2016· article· en· W1523308299 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ralph J. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueLand Economics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandGroundwater rechargeRecreationArable landEasementWaterfowlPopulationResource (disambiguation)WildlifeLand useAgricultureHabitatMarshEnvironmental scienceGeographyWater resource managementEnvironmental protectionGroundwaterEcologyAquifer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wetlands of the prairie pothole region of the North Central United States and neighboring Canada constitutes an important natural resource which has alternative but competing uses.' In their natural state these wetlands provide habitat for wildlife and such hydrologic benefits as water quality maintenance, groundwater recharge, and flood control. They are of key importance to migratory waterfowl; in a normal year as much as 55 percent of the total North American duck population is produced in wetlands.2 In their alternative use these same wetlands, when drained, provide arable land and eliminate the cost of tilling around potholes. Recent changes in the agricultural situation have increased the pressure to drain these wetlands for crop production. For the most part, these prairie wetlands are privately owned and are widely dispersed over a large geographic area. This creates a problem of optimal resource allocation because the primary benefits arising from the prairie wetlands accrue broadly, while the costs of producing this recreation-producing resource are borne by the private owners of these wetlands. Accordingly, there have been strong incentives, over time, to drain and convert these wetlands to

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLand EconomicsSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207