MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341936096 · doi:10.1093/biosci/biw030

Formal Integration of Science and Management Systems Needed to Achieve Thriving and Prosperous Great Lakes

2016· article· en· W2341936096 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Irena F. Creed, Roland Cormier, Katrina L. Laurent, Francesco Accatino, Jason Igras, Phaedra Henley, Kathryn Bryk Friedman, Lucinda B. Johnson, Jill Crossman, Peter Dillon, Charles G. Trick

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWater Resources and Governance
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityWestern University
FundersCanadian Water Network
KeywordsThrivingStandardizationEnvironmental resource managementBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Risk managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For over a century, governments on both sides of the Canada–US border have employed diverse policy instruments and management tools to protect the Great Lakes. This crucial freshwater resource continues to show signs of degradation. We explore how the International Organization for Standardization Risk Management Standard (ISO 31000) can be used by governments to reduce the risk of failing to achieve the policy objectives of the Great Lakes. ISO 31000 facilitates the analysis of human activities that drive the causal pathways of ecosystem pressures–effects–impacts and analyzes the links between these causal pathways and the performance of management measures operating within the Great Lakes. ISO 31000 allows governments to shed light on why, despite best intentions, management measures are not working and enables governments to continually improve the management system until the risks of policy failures are reduced to acceptable levels, bringing new hope to the future of the Great Lakes.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.028
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioScienceSame topicWater Resources and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207