MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884966364 · doi:10.1111/cag.12483

Species at risk in Ontario: An examination of environmental non‐governmental organizations

2018· article· en· W2884966364 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrea Olive, Grant Penton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsGeneral Electric (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChampionBiodiversityGovernment (linguistics)Biodiversity conservationEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessPolitical scienceGeographyEcologyBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biodiversity loss and species at risk conservation are significant global environmental issues. In Ontario, one of Canada's largest and most biologically diverse provinces, the government passed stringent species at risk policy in 2007, which it has since failed to fully implement. Such failure leaves a void that must be filled by other actors. This paper examines that role that environmental non‐governmental organizations (eNGOs) play in species at risk conservation in Ontario. A survey of 42 conservation eNGOs reveals that there is a small core group of dedicated eNGOs in the province. These groups maintain open lines of communication with landowners, government, and each other, while fulfilling the traditional roles of public education and advocacy. While there is no single eNGO in Ontario to champion species at risk as a single issue, there are numerous groups working together to improve species at risk conservation in the province.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.151
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207