MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973717825 · doi:10.1002/aqc.1019

Historic marine invertebrate species inventory: case study of a science baseline towards establishing a marine conservation area

2009· article· en· W1973717825 on OpenAlexaffabout
N. A. Sloan, Patrick Bartier

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsParks Canada
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNature Conservancy
KeywordsMarine protected areaBaseline (sea)BiodiversityMarine conservationMarine biodiversityMarine speciesGeographyMarine invertebratesInvertebrateEnvironmental resource managementIndigenousFisheryEcologyHabitatEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Assessing species diversity is a basic requirement for conservation, and protecting biodiversity is a major goal of marine area conservation. A case study is presented on the development of a literature‐based (1870s to 2000), museum collection‐based, georeferenced inventory of marine invertebrate species of the Haida Gwaii (Queen Charlotte Islands) region, Canada. Database structure and quality assurance are described, along with including indigenous people's words for species towards using traditional knowledge within cooperative marine conservation area management. The utility of this type of inventory is proposed as a starting point for gathering regional biodiversity knowledge, and facilitating addition of other knowledge types, towards marine area conservation. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater EcosystemsSame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207