Balancing Communities, Economies, and the Environment in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Balancing the needs of local communities, their economies, and associated natural resources is critical to the long-term success of individual communities and larger regions and ecosystems. This is especially true in mountain communities which are increasingly susceptible to land use and land cover changes, and where limited knowledge exists relating to these interactions and the perceptions of local stake holders and decision makers. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), centered on Yellowstone National Park and extending through parts of Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, is an ideal location to study the interrelations of economic growth and environmental protection due to the region's complex mosaic of private and public lands, competing natural resource uses, and rapid population growth. The objective of this study was to determine how residents of three communities within the GYE perceive, prioritize, and act upon issues of sustainability community development and natural resource management through key informant interviews. Keywords: sustainability, social-ecological systems, decision-making, perceptions, Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".