MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035174898 · doi:10.5751/es-05202-180240

Using Artificial Neural Networks for the Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems

2013· article· en· W2035174898 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ulrich Frey, Hannes Rusch

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsInterdependenceComputer scienceSustainabilityCorporate governanceArtificial neural networkResource (disambiguation)EcologyArtificial intelligenceRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature on common pool resource (CPR) governance lists numerous factors that influence whether a given CPR system achieves ecological long-term sustainability. Up to now there is no comprehensive model to integrate these factors or to explain success within or across cases and sectors. Difficulties include the absence of large-N studies, the incomparability of single case studies, and the interdependence of factors. We propose (1) a synthesis of 24 success factors based on the current social-ecological systems (SES) framework and a literature review and (2) the application of neural networks on a database of CPR management case studies in an attempt to test the viability of this synthesis. This method allows us to obtain an implicit quantitative and rather precise model of the interdependencies in CPR systems. Given such a model, every success factor in each case can be manipulated separately, yielding different predictions for success. This could become a fast and inexpensive way to analyze, predict, and optimize performance for communities worldwide facing CPR challenges. Existing theoretical frameworks could be improved as well.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207