MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081305132 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v3n1p51

Analysis of Poaching Activities in Kainji Lake National Park of Nigeria

2012· article· en· W2081305132 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExperience-Based Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoachingGeographySocioeconomicsNational parkDescriptive statisticsLivestockEnvironmental protectionForestryEnvironmental healthStatisticsPopulationMedicineMathematicsArchaeologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of poaching activities in Kanji Lake National Park (KLNP) of Nigeria was conducted with the aim of investigating the forms and trend of encroachment experienced in the premier protected area, and to determine the locations where poaching occur. Data for the study were collected using two sets of structured questionnaires and secondary data obtained from administrative records. A set of structured questionnaires was administered randomly to 30% of households in ten selected communities close to the park. The second set of questionnaires was administered to 30% of the staff in park protection section of KLNP. In all 403 households and 53 staff members were sampled. Data on poaching arrest were obtained from administrative records. Data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics in form of frequencies of count, percentages, graphs, bar chart and pie chart. Grazing of livestock and hunting were the form of encroachment most arrested in the park between 2001 and 2009. Poachers were most attracted in the park by Animals (92.06%), fuel wood (82.13%), Herbs (73.95%), and Fish (73.95%). Between 1995 and 2009 KLNP recorded the highest arrest (372) of poachers in 1999. Increase in the number of staff of KLNP had no significant effect in the number of poachers arrested within this period. Oli and Ibbi were respectively ranked first (69.98%) and second (45.91%) by household respondents as major areas of poaching. About 52.11% of households are optimistic that poaching can be stopped while 39.5% perceived that it can only be minimized. However, 39.15% of household respondents suggested creation of employment opportunities for households as a strategy that can stop poaching in KLNP.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.282 · 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