MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602171154 · doi:10.1080/23311886.2015.1047564

Using a community-driven approach to identify local forest and climate change priorities in Teslin, Yukon

2015· article· en· W1602171154 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joleen Timko, Scott Green, Robin Sharples, Adam Grinde

Bibliographic record

VenueCogent Social Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaGovernment of Northwest TerritoriesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocal communityWildlifeClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementWork (physics)Environmental planningProcess (computing)PerceptionGeographyPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The likelihood of addressing the complex environmental, economic, and social/cultural issues associated with local climate change impacts is enhanced when collaborative partnerships with local people are established. Using a community-centered approach in the Teslin region of Canada’s Yukon Territory, we utilized our research skills to respond to local needs for information by facilitating both an internal community process to clarify traditional and local knowledge, values, and perceptions on locally identified priorities, while gathering external information to enable local people to make sound decisions. Specifically, we sought to clarify local perceptions surrounding climate change impacts on fire risk and wildlife habitat, and the potential adaptation strategies appropriate and feasible within the Teslin Tlingit Traditional Territory. This paper provides a characterization of the study region and our project team; provides background on the interview and data collection process; presents our key results; and discusses the importance of our findings and charts a way forward for our continued work with the people in the Teslin region. This approach presents an excellent opportunity to help people holistically connect a range of local values, including fire risk mitigation, habitat enhancement, economic development, and enhanced social health.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogent Social SciencesSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207