MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988660948 · doi:10.1007/978-981-32-9915-3_21

Digital Earth in Australia

2019· book-chapter· en· W2988660948 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zaffar Sadiq Mohamed-Ghouse, Cheryl Desha, Luis Perez-Mora

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChubu UniversityFrontierSIGriffith UniversityJoint Research CentreInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsGlobeGeospatial analysisDigital EarthContext (archaeology)GeographyData qualityData scienceBig dataPolitical scienceBusinessComputer scienceCartographyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Australia must overcome a number of challenges to meet the needs of our growing population in a time of increased climate variability. Fortunately, we have unprecedented access to data about our land and the built environment that is internationally regarded for its quality. Over the last two decades Australia has risen to the forefront in developing and implementing Digital Earth concepts, with several key national initiatives formalising our digital geospatial journey in digital globes, open data access and ensuring data quality. In particular and in part driven by a lack of substantial resources in space, we have directed efforts towards world-leading innovation in big data processing and storage. This chapter highlights these geospatial initiatives, including case-uses, lessons learned, and next steps for Australia. Initiatives addressed include the National Data Grid (NDG), the Queensland Globe, G20 Globe, NSW Live (formerly NSW Globe), Geoscape, the National Map, the Australian Geoscience Data Cube and Digital Earth Australia. We explore several use cases and conclude by considering lessons learned that are transferrable for our colleagues internationally. This includes challenges in: 1) Creating an active context for data use, 2) Capacity building beyond ‘show-and-tell’, and 3) Defining the job market and demand for the market.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.013

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207