MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170643691 · doi:10.15021/00002665

Co-Management of Beluga Whales in Nunavik (Arctic Quebec), Canada

2005· article· en· W2170643691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nobuhiro Kishigami

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleWhalingArcticGeographyFisheryEcologyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Since 1996, Nunavik Inuit of Northern Quebec, Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada have been engaged in the co-management of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in the Nunavik region of Arctic Canada. However, this co management system has not functioned effectively in terms of resource management and use. The aim of this paper is to explore why serious problems have been encountered in the implementation of co-management and use of common marine resources such as beluga whale stocks in Arctic Quebec. First, I review changes in the co-management practices in the Nunavik region from 1996 to 2002. Second, I point out several problems related to these changes. The problems include decision making procedures, bureaucratic problems, and conflicts between the use of indigenous knowledge and that of scientific knowledge, etc. Finally, I propose one possible solution to the problems, employing Berkes' concept of 'cross-scale institutional linkages.'"

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University)Same topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207