MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595389468

Invasive Seaweed: Global and Regional Law and Policy Responses

2007· article· en· W2595389468 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David VanderZwaag

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge@SchulichLaw · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionContext (archaeology)Convention on Biological DiversityUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaPrecautionary principlePolitical scienceGeographyRegional scienceEnvironmental resource managementLawBiodiversityEcologyEconomicsBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider law and policy responses to invasive seaweeds at global and regional levels. Key global regimes considered include the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention and the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species. Contributions from the Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Maritime Organization are also considered in the global context. At a regional level, examples of efforts in North America and Europe are offered to illustrate challenges and opportunities for regional responses to invasive seaweeds. We conclude with law and policy recommendations, most notably the need to approach the issue of invasive seaweeds in a manner consistent with the precautionary principle. This paper was co-authored with Meinhard Doelle , Dalhousie University ( mdoelle@dal.ca ) and Moira McConnell , Dalhousie University ( moira.mcconnell@dal.ca ).

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0130.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge@SchulichLawSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207