MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191816075 · doi:10.5558/tfc2011-089

Assisted migration: Introduction to a multifaceted concept

2011· article· en· W2191816075 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine Ste-Marie, Elizabeth A. Nelson, Anna Dabros, M. Bonneau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologySubject (documents)Context (archaeology)Action (physics)Climate changeData scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental ethicsEcologyEnvironmental resource managementManagement scienceEngineering ethicsEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental scienceLibrary scienceBiologyEngineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea that humans can assist nature by purposely moving species to suitable habitats to fill the gap between their migration capability and the expected rate of climate change is being increasingly contemplated and debated as an adaptive management option. The interest in assisted migration, both in the scientific community and society at large, is growing rapidly and is starting to be translated into action in Canada. However, the concept is in its infancy; clear terminology has not yet been established and assisted migration still encompasses a broad range of practices. This introductory paper for the special issue of The Forestry Chronicle on the subject of assisted migration describes increasing interest in the subject and its complexity. It also provides an overview of the potential scale of assisted migration, proposes a terminology, and briefly introduces the following papers. Overall, the five papers aim to present a comprehensive state of the scientific and operational knowledge and the debate on assisted migration in the context of Canada's forests.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations110
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207