MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747006719 · doi:10.1080/00908320490467332

An Evaluation of the Modular Approach to the Assessment and Management of Large Marine Ecosystems

2004· article· en· W2747006719 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean Development & International Law · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designAction planContext (archaeology)Corporate governanceEnvironmental resource managementAction (physics)Ecosystem approachEcosystem-based managementPrincipal (computer security)EcosystemMarine ecosystemPlan (archaeology)Process managementBusinessComputer scienceEnvironmental planningEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental scienceEcologyEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This contribution discusses the modular approach to the assessment and management of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). It addresses the contents and functions of the five modules; the key elements and processes of the transboundary diagnostic analysis (TDA), strategic action program (SAP), and national action plan (NAP) in the LME context; the principal common problems facing LMEs and their causes identified in TDAs and action plans formulated in SAPs, as the results of the practical application of the modular approach in LME projects. It also evaluates the significance of the modular approach for international ocean governance. It concludes that this integrated, ecosystem-based approach has rectified some deficiencies of the traditional sectoral approaches and has improved the understanding of LMEs and their management regimes. As a result the integrated, ecosystem-based approach is increasingly being endorsed in international governance of LMEs.­

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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