MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915500942

CONJURER UN SORT INCERTAIN : LE PRINCIPE DE PRECAUTION ET L’EVALUATION DES ESPECES EN PERIL AU CANADA

2008· article· fr· W2915500942 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hélène Leroux

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Bar Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeEndangered speciesRisk assessmentPrecautionary principleWildlife tradeListing (finance)GeographyLegislationEnvironmental planningBusinessPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental protectionEcologyLawComputer scienceBiologyEnvironmental scienceHabitatComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Species at Risk Act seeks to protect endangered wildlife species of the flora and fauna in Canada. The Act establishes a listing process to designate wildlife species at risk based on an assessment of their status done by an expert committee (COSEWIC). Then recovery strategies and action plans will be prepared to insure that these species at risk are protected. However, economic considerations may interfere with scientific assessments when species of interest for commercial purposes are considered at risk. Therefore, is the Species at Risk Act of some help to insure that the protection of these wildlife species at risk should prevail under those circumstances? The present text analyses the application of the precautionary principle within the assessment and classification process set out by the Act.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Bar ReviewSame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207