Concern is in the Eye of the Stakeholder: Heterogeneous Assessments of the Threats to Oyster Survival and Restoration in North Carolina
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coastal oceans and estuaries face unprecedented threats to sustainability and productivity. The vulnerability of these ecosystems persists in part due to how threats to them are perceived. Understanding the subjectivity in how stakeholders frame and assess threats to coastal ecosystems is critical to management and restoration. This study utilized a participatory risk mapping methodology to assess how stakeholders in oysters (Crassostrea virginica) in North Carolina perceive the threats to oyster survival and efforts to restore oyster populations. The resulting threat maps demonstrate that stakeholders perceived different threats and assessed the same threats with varying levels of concern. Stakeholder groups expressed contradictory views of the threats from harvest and natural disturbances, revealing differences in perceptions of nature and how stakeholders view themselves in relation to the environment—a relationship that reflects history, knowledge, expectations, culture, and economy. Unresolved, these differences can impede management processes and diminish the effectiveness of restoration activities.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 it