MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553689785 · doi:10.5751/es-00512-070202

Morris, W. F., and D. F. Doak. 2003. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA

2003· article· en· W2553689785 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John L. Sabo

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Ecology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulation viability analysisEnvironmental ethicsPopulationBiologyEcologySociologyDemographyPhilosophyEndangered species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sabo, J. 2003. Morris, W. F., and D. F. Doak. 2003. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. Conservation Ecology 7(2):2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00512-070202

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.013

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations727
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207