MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329779023 · doi:10.5751/es-05847-180415

Do the Principles of Ecological Restoration Cover EU LIFE Nature Cofunded Projects in Denmark?

2013· article· en· W2329779023 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonas Morsing, Sally Ida Frandsen, Henrik Vejre, Karsten Raulund‐Rasmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNordisk Ministerråd
KeywordsCover (algebra)Restoration ecologyEcologyEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morsing, J., S. I. Frandsen, H. Vejre, and K. Raulund-Rasmussen. 2013. Do the principles of ecological restoration cover EU LIFE Nature cofunded projects in Denmark? Ecology and Society 18(4): 15. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05847-180415

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0070.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207