MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Three Gorges Dam: an ecological perspective

2004· review· en· W2167814264 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and the Environment · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsBiodiversityThree gorgesEcologyChinaHabitatGeographyEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementHabitat fragmentationAquatic biodiversity researchFragmentation (computing)Environmental scienceBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Three Gorges Dam in China is the largest dam ever built. Its impacts on the biodiversity and ecological processes in the region are causing concern to ecologists worldwide. The dam and associated environmental alterations may result in a number of regional changes in terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity, as well as in ecosystem structure and functioning. The dam may also provide a rare opportunity for a grand-scale experiment in habitat fragmentation, allowing ecologists to develop and test a series of hypotheses concerning the dynamics of biodiversity and biotic communities and their responses to disturbances. Such research can help improve conservation practices, stimulate international collaborations, and promote public education on the environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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