MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909054933 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2019.01.024

Summary of the underlying dataset to assist in tracking resilience of rural agricultural communities

2019· article· en· W2909054933 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lívia Bíziková, Ruth Waldick

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaInternational Institute for Sustainable Development
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsAgricultureResilience (materials science)Vulnerability (computing)Environmental resource managementClimate changePsychological resilienceSet (abstract data type)Environmental planningAdaptation (eye)Perspective (graphical)GeographyRegional scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEcologyComputer securityPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A list of indicators that can be used to track resilience of agricultural communities is presented in this brief. The provided data set covers a unique overview of policy-relevant indicators based on data on climate change impacts, vulnerability, adaptation, agriculture and rural development. This data is grouped into six critical sectors that are crucial for policy-makers to track resilience. The data is transferable and can be adjusted to different communities as the listed definitions can be modified to account for the specific local conditions. The indicators were used to identify a set of resilience indicators for rural agricultural communities in Ontario Canada (for details see "An Indicator Set to Track Resilience to Climate Change in Agriculture: A policy-maker׳s perspective" [1]).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.026

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207