MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1568726226 · doi:10.4000/confins.6597

« L’Amazonie – victime des changements climatiques ? »

2010· article· fr· W1568726226 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Weissenberger, Delaine Sampaio da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueConfins · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceForestryGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La forêt d’Amazonie est un des biomes les plus riches et les plus importants de la Terre. Cependant, son avenir est gravement menacé par les changements climatiques. L’effet de ces changements est indissociable de celui des activités humaines. Ainsi, la déforestation est responsable de plus de la moitié des émissions de gaz à effet de serre du Brésil. La lutte contre les changements climatique au Brésil passe donc en premier lieu par la lutte contre la déforestation. Cette lutte fait face aux enjeux actuels du développement en Amazonie, en premier lieu l’élevage et l’agriculture à grande échelle. Certains éléments des politiques récentes du Brésil vont dans le sens d’un développement moins « sauvage » en Amazonie, mais se heurtent à des intérêts économiques et politiques. Les initiatives internationales comme Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), dans le cadre d’un accord climatique, peuvent fournir des incitatifs économiques cruciaux. Il est dans tous les cas primordial qu’un tel développement soit adapté à la réalité amazonienne et se fasse en collaboration avec les populations locales dans une optique de développement social autant qu’écologique ou économique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConfinsSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207