MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316458587 · doi:10.5632/jila.66.699

Issues Related with the Introduction of a Planning Framework Founded on the Conservation of Recreational Experience into Natural Park Planning in Japan

2003· article· en· W2316458587 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Japanese Institute of Landscape Architecture · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban and spatial planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationZoningEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementNational parkBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to manage the probelms induced by increasing public demands for outdoor recreation and diversification of recreational use in national parks, this study investigated the validity and the subjects for introducing key points of the planning frameworks developed in U.S.A. and Canada for coping with these problems into the planning of national parks in Japan. Research papers concerning about park planning process founded upon the framework of “Recreational Opportunity Spectrum” were studied to discuss key points in detail. As a result, there was a series of developed system to conserve natural resources and diversity of opportunities of recreational experience. Among the important elements presented were the followings: specific statements of park purpose; zoning system based on the characteristics of settings; identification of indicator reflecting conditions of each zone, standards specifying a limit of acceptable change; logical linkage between standards and park purpose; monitoring the conditions; countermeasure to unacceptable change of the conditions; and feedback of consequences of management action to revise the planning. Based on the result, we should survey to make inventories of recreational opportunities for zoning system and to identify indicators and standards of acceptable change of each zone.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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