MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148882672 · doi:10.7202/044883ar

Environmental restoration of urban rivers in the metropolitan region of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

2010· article· en· W2148882672 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lúcia Maria Sá Antunes Costa, Laura Vescina, Denise Barcellos Pinheiro Machado

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironnement urbain · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMetropolitan areaEnvironmental restorationEnvironmental planningRestoration ecologyGeographyGovernment (linguistics)Environmental protectionState (computer science)Environmental resource managementPolitical scienceArchaeologyEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to expand our understanding of environmental discourses and practices in Brazil pertaining to urban water restoration, by focusing on the interrelations between environmental structure and urban occupation. For this purpose, it examines river and stream environmental restoration proposals within the Iguaçu Project located in Baixada Fluminense, in the state of Rio de Janeiro. The discussion begins with a brief description of the environmental restoration and landscape experience, followed by an exploration of the Baixada Fluminense social and environmental contexts. A program launched by the government is analyzed, emphasizing the development of riverside parks. The paper concludes by arguing that environmental restoration must be culturally specific in order to improve its efficacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironnement urbainSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207