MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560037984 · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2016.11.005

A 2017 Horizon Scan of Emerging Issues for Global Conservation and Biological Diversity

2016· article· en· W2560037984 on OpenAlexaff
William J. Sutherland, Phoebe Barnard, Steven Broad, Mick N. Clout, Ben Connor, Isabelle M. Côté, Lynn V. Dicks, Helen Doran, Abigail Entwistle, Erica Fleishman, Marie Fox, Kevin J. Gaston, David W. Gibbons, Zhigang Jiang, Brandon Keim, Fiona A. Lickorish, Paul Markillie, Kathryn A. Monk, James W. Pearce‐Higgins, Lloyd S. Peck, Jules Pretty, Mark Spalding, Femke H. Tonneijck, Bonnie C. Wintle, Nancy Ockendon

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Ecology & Evolution · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilCambridge Conservation InitiativeSight Research UKRoyal SocietyArcadia Fund
KeywordsDiversity (politics)Environmental resource managementEmerging technologiesDelphi methodBusinessEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of our eighth annual horizon scan of emerging issues likely to affect global biological diversity, the environment, and conservation efforts in the future. The potential effects of these novel issues might not yet be fully recognized or understood by the global conservation community, and the issues can be regarded as both opportunities and risks. A diverse international team with collective expertise in horizon scanning, science communication, and conservation research, practice, and policy reviewed 100 potential issues and identified 15 that qualified as emerging, with potential substantial global effects. These issues include new developments in energy storage and fuel production, sand extraction, potential solutions to combat coral bleaching and invasive marine species, and blockchain technology.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.021

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations133
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Ecology & EvolutionSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207