MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981852652 · doi:10.31111/vegrus/2017.30.124

Arctic vegetation archive and Classification Workshop, Prague, 30–31 March 2017

2017· article· en· W2981852652 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
N. V. Matveyeva, I. A. Lavrinenko, O. V. Lavrinenko

Bibliographic record

VenueVegetation of Russia · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticVegetation (pathology)Circumpolar starVegetation classificationGeographyPhysical geographyCzechDatabaseEnvironmental resource managementForestryEnvironmental scienceOceanographyComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The two-day Arctic Vegetation Archive and Classification Workshop, in which twenty-nine individuals (two in absentia) from 9 countries (EU: Czech Republic, Germany, Norway, Slovak Republic, Switzerland, The Netherlands; Russia, USA, Canada) participated, took place at the Czech Academy of Science Building, Prague, Czech Republic, on 30–31 April 2017. An Arctic Vegetation Archive (AVA) is essential for deve­loping an Arctic Vegetation Classification (AVC) and is needed for a variety of international Arctic initiatives that involve Arctic vegetation information. The AVA will gather vegetation and environmental data from approximately 31 000 legacy vegetation plots into a standardized format for vegetation classification and analysis. The primary goal is to develop a stra­tegy for each country to assemble its own archive with common protocols that will later allow the databases to be united into a single AVA using TurboVeg v3 and then use JUICE software to create a Pan Arctic vegetation classification. Several overview and keynote talks set the stage. We reviewed the datasets and plots that are available for each of the floristic provinces in each circumpolar country. Discussions focused on the exchange of data between different database approaches, reflections on the realization of a pan-Arctic vegetation classification, steps still needed to achieve the AVC. At the end of the meeting, the assembled members resolved to accomplish the following within 5 years: – develop a checklist of existing described Arctic vegetation habitat and vegetation types (an Arctic prodromus) according the European Vegetation Classification approach. – develop and use standardized plot-data collection and archiving methods modeled after the European Vegetation Archive and the Alaska Arctic Vegetation Archive. – modify the existing vector-based Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map to a raster-based format with 12.5-km resolution, and incorporate modifications based on new knowledge. – work with the Arctic Data Center (ADC) to develop data-sharing methods and rules for Arctic ve­getation data. – contribute to training a new generation of young professional Arctic botanists and vegetation scientists through international field courses at the University of the Arctic and the Association of Polar Early Career Scientists (APECS). There was understanding of the necessity to deve­lop a funding strategy to secure funds for completing the AVA and AVC. Finally we resolved to meet again at Arctic Science Summit Week 2019 in Arkhangelsk, Russia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVegetation of RussiaSame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207