MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2543584891 · doi:10.31542/j.ecj.16

Conservation in Madasgascar

2011· article· en· W2543584891 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Darren Joneson

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Common Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityLemurGeographyNatural resourceNatural (archaeology)Diversity (politics)Variety (cybernetics)EcologyEnvironmental ethicsEthnologyPolitical scienceHistoryArchaeologyBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When most people hear the word Madagascar, images of animated dancing lemurs and quirky stranded penguins come to their minds. Although there is some truth in the movie’s description of that far-away, mysterious place, it fails to paint a complete picture of Madagascar as being rich in biodiversity and culture. Few places on earth rival the variety of endemic plants and animals that are found there. It is estimated that Madagascar has more genetic diversity per unit area than anywhere else on earth (Karsten, et al., 2009). This makes it “one of the world’s hottest hotspots for biodiversity conservation” (Consiglio, et al., 2006). Even though Madagascar is a biologically invaluable nation, it trails behind other ecologically notable countries, like Ecuador, in the conservation effort. Madagascar continues to suffer devastating loss to its precious habitats. The Madagascar government has the difficult task of preserving as much ecologically unique territory as it can, without depriving the already economically disadvantaged local people. Much international help is needed in providing support to the people and protection to the plants, animals, and natural resources of Madagascar.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Common JournalSame topicAnimal and Plant Science EducationFrench-language works237,207