MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049572657 · doi:10.3138/3660-4078-55x1-3808

The Realization of ICA Commission Projects on Planetary Cartography

2005· article· en· W2049572657 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
K. B. Shingareva, Jim Zimbelman, Manfred Buchroithner, Henrik Hargitai

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geography and Cartography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlossaryCommissionGeographyCartographyHarmonizationEuropean commissionPlanetary scienceTheme (computing)Library sciencePlanetary explorationResource (disambiguation)Computer sciencePolitical scienceEuropean unionAstrobiologyArtMars Exploration ProgramWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Cartographic Association (ICA) Commission on Planetary Cartography was officially established on the basis of the ICA Planetary Cartography Working Group at the ICA Congress in Ottawa in August 1999. Its goal is to develop materials and information intended to aid in the global dissemination of planetary cartographic information. The overall theme of this effort is the harmonization of international planetary cartographic activities. The commission's activities can help especially in those countries not actively involved in ongoing spacecraft missions, bringing together scientists from diverse backgrounds (planetary science, earth science, cartography) who have not interacted previously, along with map and atlas publishers. The Planetary Cartography Database, the Multilingual Planetary Maps, and the Multilingual Glossary can serve as a reliable resource for cartographers who wish to produce and study planetary maps.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicHistorical Geography and CartographyFrench-language works237,207