MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989104089 · doi:10.1890/06-0127

IMPLEMENTING CITES REGULATIONS FOR TIMBER

2007· article· en· W1989104089 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur G. Blundell

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island UniversityAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCITESSwietenia macrophyllaEndangered speciesConference of the partiesAgroforestryBusinessInternational tradeConventionEcologyGeographyForestryBiologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foresters are currently confronted with a new challenge. For the first time a commonly traded timber species has been listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). At the 12th Conference of the Parties in November 2002, countries voted 68 to 30 to place the premier timber species of Latin America, big-leaf mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King [Meliaceae]), on CITES Appendix II. Under Appendix II regulations, trade in mahogany requires that exporting countries verify that each shipment was legally obtained and that its harvest was non-detrimental to the survival of the species. Unfortunately, implementation has been weak, in part because countries have yet to develop a common, pragmatic, cost-effective system to make the legal and non-detriment findings. This paper recommends what such a system might include.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0140.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.008

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207