MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104419732 · doi:10.18584/iipj.2012.3.2.3

Dealing with Culturally Sensitive Areas in Industrial Project Design

2012· article· en· W2104419732 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alan Ehrlich

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Indigenous Policy Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousProcess (computing)Order (exchange)PoliticsCulturally appropriateBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceComputer scienceGeographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Potential cultural impacts from proposed industrial developments can affect culturally sensitive areas that are important to Aboriginal peoples. These cultural impacts are important for legal, political, and moral reasons and can have a major influence on project approval or rejection during environmental impact assessment. It is in the interest of developers to identify and consider potential impacts on culturally sensitive areas early in the project proposal process in order to design projects that minimize or avoid these impacts. A key strategy is to engage communities effectively in the process. Different types of mitigation measures, including off-site cultural mitigation, may be appropriate for different types of culturally sensitive areas, but avoidance may be the only option for certain non-negotiable areas.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Indigenous Policy JournalSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207