MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034467536 · doi:10.1088/2515-7620/ab9c33

Pan-Arctic analysis of cultural ecosystem services using social media and automated content analysis

2020· article· en· W3034467536 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsArcticWildlifeContent analysisGeographyNatural (archaeology)Social mediaThe arcticEcologyWorld Wide WebComputer scienceSociologyArchaeologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the Arctic, as in many parts of the world, interactions with the natural world are an important part of people’s experience and are often recorded in photographs. Emerging methods for automated content analysis of social media data offers opportunities to discover information on cultural ecosystem services from photographs across large samples of people and countries. We analysed over 800 000 Flickr photographs using Google’s Cloud Vision algorithm to identify the components of the natural environment most photographed and to map how and where different people interact with nature across eight Arctic countries. Almost all (91.1%) of users took one or more photographs of biotic nature, and such photos account for over half (53.2%) of Arctic photos on Flickr. We find that although the vast majority of Arctic human-nature interactions occur outside protected areas, people are slightly more likely to photograph nature inside protected areas after accounting for the low accessibility of Arctic protected areas. Wildlife photographers travel further from roads than people who take fewer photographs of wildlife, and people venture much further from roads inside protected areas. A large diversity of nature was reflected in the photographs, from mammals, birds, fish, fungi, plants and invertebrates, signalling an untapped potential to connect and engage people in the appreciation and conservation of the natural world. Our findings suggest that, despite limitations, automated content analysis can be a rapid and readily accessed source of data on how and where people interact with nature, and a large-scale method for assessing cultural ecosystem services across countries and cultures.

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)0.001
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 score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.206 · 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