MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149738622 · doi:10.1068/b2749t

The Gulf of Maine Environmental Information Exchange: Participation, Observation, Conversation

2001· article· en· W2149738622 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Charles Schroeder, Paul Boudreau, Chris E W Brehme, Andrew M. Boyce, Alison Evans, Aviva Rahmani

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and Design · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation exchangeCitizen journalismInformation sharingConversationKnowledge managementCorporate governanceParticipatory GISProcess (computing)Public participationPublic relationsBusinessEnvironmental resource managementComputer sciencePolitical scienceSociologyWorld Wide WebTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we describe an attempt to create an inclusive and participatory information sharing network across a large geographic region, the Gulf of Maine. This network aims to contribute to the health of the region's human and natural environments through facilitating partnerships among individuals and organizations that are already working toward this goal. Initiated at a time when cooperation, public learning, and information sharing increasingly depend on digital information technologies, this effort represents a turn away from earlier attempts to create centralized data sharing systems toward a more people-centered and project-centered approach. After introducing the Gulf of Maine Environmental Information Exchange and its region, particular projects will be described, along with the on-line technologies that are being applied including those related to digital mapping. A description of the purposes of the Information Exchange follows, with details about a network organization which is being shaped based on principles that have emerged through participant interactions. Public participation GIS and the community-based fisheries management movement are presented as examples of participatory governance that have contributed to discussions within the Information Exchange. We conclude with a summary of the accomplishments of this network building process and the challenges its participants recognize at this time.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and DesignSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207