MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071734206 · doi:10.5751/es-05924-180445

Understanding Adaptive Capacity in Forest Governance: Editorial

2013· article· en· W2071734206 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E. Carina H. Keskitalo

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsAdaptive capacityClimate changeVulnerability (computing)Flooding (psychology)Context (archaeology)Environmental resource managementPsychological resilienceCorporate governanceAdaptation (eye)Environmental planningPolitical scienceBusinessGeographyEconomicsEcologyComputer sciencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"The term adaptive capacity has often been used to indicate the role that various factors may play in determining the extent to which adaptation to climate change - different actions to deal with the consequences of climate change - is possible. While the focus on adaptive capacity has been pronounced within climate change literature, this literature strongly acknowledges that adaptation will not take place with regard to climate change alone. Adaption to climate change should rather be seen in the context of adaption to all other coexisting stressors, or what has been called double or multiple impacts. The social, economic and political situation thus plays a part in determining whether environmental impact or exposure will result in vulnerability and in consequences on the ground. For instance, a flood will only become a disaster if the preparedness needed to deal with the consequences of flooding does not exist. The adaptive capacity or resources to deal with the risk of flooding, such as the existence of emergency plans and the existence of funding and personnel, are crucial."

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0120.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207