MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988130669 · doi:10.2134/jeq2001.3031100x

Upscaling and Downscaling Methods for Environmental Research

2001· article· en· W2988130669 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationLibrary scienceDownscalingComputer scienceWorld Wide WebEcologyClimate changeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overall, the book is very well done.A notable feature is the various papers that have been prepared on different scaling studies.The references cited within this book represent appli-amount of referencing; 100 references per chapter was not uncommon.The book is essential for anyone dealing with new cations from a variety of locations and studies and the authors are to be commended for their incorporation of several exam-or unusual compounds.I suspect most consultants and regulators in this area will need to have a copy, if not to use them-ples.The outline of the book provides an introduction about the problem of scaling and the general principles of upscaling selves, then to aid in interpretation of what others are using.The book may also serve as an advanced reference book for (aggregation) or downscaling (disaggregation).All of the major terms that the readers need to understand in order to put students, although I doubt there are many courses offered that could use this as a text.If there were, it could serve that concepts into practice are defined in a glossary and there are ample figures to visually explain the concepts.The material in purpose well.The indexing is good.I found few errors.I think this book will be in demand.-STEVESHEPPARD, the book is presented in an instructive manner that leads the reader through theory into practice.There are only three ECOMatters Inc., Pinawa, MB, Canada, R0E 1L0 (sheppards

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.

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)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.334 · 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