MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085038452 · doi:10.1139/facets-2019-0027

Synthesizing and communicating climate change impacts to inform coastal adaptation planning

2020· article· en· W3085038452 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Charlotte K. Whitney, Tugce Conger, Natalie C. Ban, Romney McPhie

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPacific Institute for Climate SolutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementVulnerability (computing)Adaptation (eye)Environmental planningClimate change adaptationGeneral partnershipGeographyMarine spatial planningEnvironmental scienceBusinessOceanographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Planning for adaptation to climate change requires regionally relevant information on rising air and ocean temperatures, sea levels, increasingly frequent and intense storms, and other climate-related impacts. However, in many regions there are limited focused syntheses of the climate impacts, risks, and potential adaptation strategies for coastal marine areas and sectors. We report on a regional assessment of climate change impacts and recommendations for adaptation strategies in the NE Pacific Coast (British Columbia, Canada), conducted in collaboration with a regional planning and plan implementation partnership (Marine Plan Partnership for the North Pacific Coast), aimed at bridging the gaps between climate science and regional adaptation planning. We incorporated both social and ecological aspects of climate change impacts and adaptations, and the feedback mechanisms which may result in both increased risks and opportunities for the following areas of interest: “Ecosystems”, “Fisheries and Aquaculture”, “Communities”, and “Marine Infrastructure”. As next steps within the region, we propose proactive planning measures including communication of the key impacts and projections and cross-sectoral assessments of climate vulnerability and risk to direct decision-making.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

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 science0.0000.003
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicCoastal and Marine ManagementFrench-language works237,207