MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977059676 · doi:10.1177/2053019619877103

The Internet of Nature: How taking nature online can shape urban ecosystems

2019· article· en· W2977059676 on OpenAlexaff
Nadina Galle, Sophie Nitoslawski, Francesco Pilla

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Anthropocene Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsUrbanizationUrban ecosystemDigital ecosystemThe InternetEcosystemFrontierResilience (materials science)Smart cityUrban planningNatural capitalBusinessWork (physics)Ecosystem managementEnvironmental resource managementPsychological resilienceEcosystem servicesEnvironmental planningComputer scienceGeographyEngineeringEcologyInternet privacyInternet of ThingsKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebEnvironmental scienceCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many of our cities are going digital. From self-driving cars to smart grids to intelligent traffic signals, these smart cities put data and digital technology to work to drive efficiency and improve the quality of life for citizens. Yet, the natural capital upon which cities rely risks being left behind by the digital revolution. Bringing nature online is the next frontier in ecosystem management and will change our relationship with the natural world in the urban age. In this article, we introduce the ‘Internet of Nature’ to bridge the gap between greener and smarter cities and to explore the future of urban ecosystem management in an age of rapid urbanisation and digitisation. The creation of an Internet of Nature, along with the ecosystem intelligence it provides, is an opportunity to elicit and understand urban ecosystem dynamics, promote self-sufficiency and resilience in ecosystem management and enhance connections between urban social and ecological systems.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations60
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Anthropocene ReviewSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207