Protected areas and regional sustainability: surveying decision makers in the Lake Superior Basin.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A central element in the promotion of ecosystem management in the Lake Superior Basin concerns residents' attitudes toward the role played by parks and preserves in the region.Although the opinions of local decision makers, who represent the larger population, are viewed as pivotal components in any drive toward regional sustainability, very little data has hitherto been collected regarding their impressions of nearby and Basin-wide networks of protected areas.This study reports results from the first comprehensive survey of decision makers in the Basin.Analysis reveals that the U.S. and Canadian populations share an appreciation for protected areas in the watershed, even though their opinions regarding local parks and preserves reflect a stronger bias toward economic development, less governmental control, and concerns over the expansion of protected areas.Results are discussed in terms of their implications for natural resource policy promulgation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it