MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345390608 · doi:10.4081/jlimnol.2016.1387

What have we learned about ecological recovery from liming interventions of acid lakes in Canada and Italy?

2016· article· en· W2345390608 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Limnology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimnologyEcosystemEnvironmental scienceWater qualityHydrology (agriculture)Physical geographyEcologyGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea of launching another special issue of the Journal of limnology on Lake Orta was born in 2014, on the 25<sup>th</sup> anniversary of its liming intervention, during an International symposium on Lake Orta organized and hosted by the Pallanza Institute (<a href="http://www.ise.cnr.it/vb">http://www.ise.cnr.it/vb</a>). The conference did not simply celebrate the past. While the liming of Lake Orta was undoubtedly a great national and international success, the speakers at the conference, instead sought to enlarge and deepen knowledge of patterns and mechanisms of lake ecosystem responses to the water quality improvements, or chemical recovery, that accompanied Lake Orta’s liming.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.238 · 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