MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138493768 · doi:10.24043/isj.156

Demographic carrying capacity model: A tool for decision-making in Rapa Nui

2021· article· en· W3138493768 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kay Bergamini, Roberto Moris, Piroska Ángel, Daniela Zaviezo, Horacio Gilabert

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change, Adaptation, Migration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsContext (archaeology)Process (computing)PopulationCarrying capacityComputer scienceQuality (philosophy)Affect (linguistics)Decision-makingOperations researchProcess managementBusinessPolitical scienceRisk analysis (engineering)SociologyEngineeringLawGeographyMarketingEcologyEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increase of population in Rapa Nui (Easter Island) has fueled concerns within the community, given the uncertainty of its impacts. These concerns have driven a socio-political process that triggered the enactment of Law 21,070, which regulates the access and permanence of visitors in the territory as a way to cushion the pressure on different environmental, social, and infrastructure components that affect the local quality of life. However, for its application, this law requires technical foundations that allow restrictions to be applied and, therefore, knowledge about the demographic capacity of the territory is also needed. To this end, a dynamic model was built, which consists of different variables that are sensitive to population growth and also can be projected into the future, thus delivering timely information for decision-making. This paper describes the socio-political context for the creation of this instrument, as well as its elaboration process and main results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicClimate Change, Adaptation, MigrationFrench-language works237,207