Uso e disponibilidade da vegetação lenhosa em comunidades rurais no Rio Grande do Norte e Paraíba, Brasil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to test the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis comparing two rural communities in Joao Câmara (RN) and Remigio (PB), in the Northeast of Brazil. This hypothesis assumes that plants are perceived, known and used by human populations according to their local availability. The most used species would be the ones that are more available in the forest (apparent), and apparently suffer greater pressure of use. Communities were consulted through semi-structured interviews. In Remigio 42 people were interviewed, and 50 in Joao Câmara. The importance of each species was evaluated considering the distinction between citations from current and potential uses. The ethnobotanical information was associated with phytosociological parameters collected by the point-centered quarter method in forested areas, where 50 transects were distributed in each community, and 4,000 individuals sampled in total. Based on the interviews, 58 useful species were recorded, 42 genera and18 families. In the phytosociological study 30 species, 22 genera and 12 families in Joao Câmara, In Remigio were identified 34 species, 22 genera and nine families.The species were grouped into 11 categories of use. The ecological appearance was confirmed only in the Joao Câmara, which best explained the relationship between local availability and use of timber resources. Positive correlations were observed also between the technology category VUpotential and dominance. The point-centered quarter was efficient to test appearance, however, further studies through the point-centered quarter method are recommended
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".