Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Dutch have been intervening in the water environment to suit their needs and requirements from the early Middle Ages onwards. Technological development has always kept pace with these requirements. However, as a result of these requirements the functions in the occupation layer have become more and more out of balance with the natural underground layer, undermining the sustainability of the system. In the 1990s there came a turning point in water management. The near floods of 1993 and 1995, the droughts of 2003 and 2005 and the imminence of climate change made the water sector realise that the current water management system is approaching its physical, technical and economic boundaries. The current changes in water management have all the characteristics of a transition. Problems like climate change are complex, the future is highly uncertain and water management has become strongly intertwined with other social and economic domains. A robust, sustainable and climate‐proof layout of the Netherlands is not the responsibility of one actor alone; it has become the responsibility of all citizens. This has far‐reaching consequences for the role of the water expert. The water expert needs to become part of the transition arena and use his/her expertise to give direction and content to the transition. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".