MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1638463005 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511546020

Monitoring in Coastal Environments Using Foraminifera and Thecamoebian Indicators

2001· book· en· W1638463005 on OpenAlexaff
David B. Scott, Franco S. Medioli, Charles T. Schafer

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2001
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Environmental resource managementForaminiferaAppealBaseline (sea)Resource (disambiguation)Natural resourceGeographyEnvironmental studiesEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceOceanographyData scienceEcologyComputer scienceGeologyPolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foraminifera and thecamoebians are highly sensitive to environmental stress (natural or anthropogenic). This feature means that they can be used to biologically characterize a variety of freshwater and coastal marine environments. Due to their small size and hard shells, large quantities are also found fossilised in core samples, making them ideal for reconstructing past environmental conditions. This volume covers the specific environmental applications of these organisms and contains an introduction to the subject, detailed descriptions of methods and techniques and case studies. Written for non-specialists, this book will appeal to resource managers and consultants in the public and private sector who routinely work on coastal environmental problems. The book will also serve as a supplementary text for graduate students in many courses on environmental monitoring, ecological baseline studies and environmental science.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations428
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207