MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101029204 · doi:10.1111/conl.12774

Next steps in dismantling discrimination: Lessons from ecology and conservation science

2020· article· en· W3101029204 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

VenueConservation Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionPrivilege (computing)Environmental ethicsEquity (law)EcologySociologyProcess (computing)Field (mathematics)ColonialismEngineering ethicsPolitical sciencePoliticsLawEngineeringComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ecology, conservation, and other scientific disciplines have histories built on the oppression of marginalized groups of people. Modern day discrimination continues in these fields and there is renewed interest in dismantling these system of oppression. In this paper, we offer some examples of historical events which have shaped the field and argue that reckoning with colonial histories is part of the process to dismantle discrimination and achieve equity and inclusion. We discuss ways forward including incorporating different knowledge systems and reflecting on one's own biases and privilege. To truly achieve fields of science which are just, diverse, and equitable will be one of our greatest challenges, but one that is necessary to protect our environment, an endeavor which cannot be detangled from societal injustices.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.192 · 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