Introduction: ^|^ldquo;Geography in the World,^|^rdquo; Prepared for the IGU Kyoto Regional Conference 2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The IGU Kyoto Regional Conference 2013 will be held at the Kyoto International Conference Center from August 4th through 9th, 2013. More than 1,000 geographers and students from all over the world are expected to participate in the meeting initiated by the International Geographical Union. A conference on geographic research of such a scale has not been held in Japan since the 24th International Geographical Congress in Tokyo 33 years ago in 1980. This special issue was planned to, along with other objectives, raise awareness about the IGU Kyoto Regional Conference 2013, not only among researchers in the fields of geography and the geosciences, but also among students, governmental organizations, and employees of private companies from related fields, and promote exchanges among geographers from all over the world. Geographical research and education vary from country to country in terms of historical development, local research organizations, research contents, university education, and curriculum. Consequently, this special issue (Part 1) and the subsequent issue (Part 2) address trends, positioning, societal roles, and future of geography in individual countries. In Part 1, we focus on European countries, namely the UK, Germany, France, Switzerland, Austria, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Poland, Slovakia, and Romania. Part 2 will cover the USA, Canada, Brazil, Korea, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, Australia, New Zealand, and Africa. Overall, we have tried to find a regional balance, and selected 25 countries and regions that are active in geographic research and education.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".