MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772143789 · doi:10.1130/abs/2017am-305180

EXOGEOCONSERVATION: PROTECTING GEOLOGICAL HERITAGE ON CELESTIAL BODIES

2017· article· en· W2772143789 on OpenAlexafffund
Jack Matthews, Sean McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts with programs - Geological Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersDepartment of Fisheries and Land ResourcesMitacsEuropean Commission
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Stewardship (theology)AstrobiologyNatural (archaeology)PlanetCultural heritageEarth scienceGeographyEnvironmental resource managementGeologyArchaeologyEnvironmental sciencePolitical sciencePoliticsAstronomyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geoconservation is an increasingly widely adopted theoretical, practical and administrative approach to the protection of geological and geomorphological features of special scientific, functional, historic, cultural, aesthetic, or ecological value.Protected sites on Earth include natural rocky outcrops, shorelines, river banks, and landscapes, as well as human-made structures such as road cuts and quarries exposing geological phenomena.However, geoconservation has rarely been discussed in the context of other rocky and icy planets, rings, moons, dwarf planets, asteroids, or comets, which present extraordinarily diverse, beautiful, and culturally, historically and scientifically important geological phenomena.Here we propose to adapt geoconservation strategies for protecting the geological heritage of these celestial bodies, and introduce the term 'exogeoconservation' and other associated terms for this purpose.We argue that exogeoconservation is acutely necessary for the scientific exploration and responsible stewardship of celestial bodies, and suggest how this might be achieved and managed by means of international protocols.We stress that such protocols must be sensitive to the needs of scientific, industrial, and other human activities, and not unduly prohibitive.However, with space exploration and exploitation likely to accelerate in coming decades, it is increasingly important that an internationally agreed, holistic framework be developed for the protection of our common 'exogeoheritage'.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbstracts with programs - Geological Society of AmericaSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207