MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A plea for a worldwide development of dark infrastructure for biodiversity – Practical examples and ways to go forward

2021· article· en· W4200356838 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

VenueLandscape and Urban Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreen infrastructureEnvironmental resource managementCritical infrastructureBiodiversitySoftware deploymentPleaEnvironmental planningBusinessGeographyEcologyComputer scienceComputer securityEnvironmental sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial light at night (ALAN) has been massively deployed worldwide and has become a major environmental pressure for biodiversity, especially contributing to habitat loss and landscape fragmentation. To mitigate these latter, green and blue infrastructure policies have been developed throughout the world based on the concept of ecological networks, a set of suitable interconnected habitats. However, currently, these nature conservation policies hardly consider the adverse effects of ALAN. Here, we promote the integration of darkness quality within the 'green and blue infrastructure', to implement a ‘dark infrastructure’. Dark infrastructure should be identified, preserved and restored at different territorial levels to guarantee ecological continuities where the night and its rhythms are as natural as possible. For this purpose, we propose an operational 4-steps process that includes 1) Mapping of light pollution in all its forms and dimensions in relation to biodiversity, 2) Identifying the dark infrastructure starting or not from the already identified green/blue infrastructure, 3) Planning actions to preserve and restore the dark infrastructure by prioritizing lighting sobriety and not only energy saving, 4) Assessing the effectiveness of the dark infrastructure with appropriate indicators. Dark infrastructure projects have already been created (for example in France and Switzerland) and can serve as case studies for both urban and natural areas. The deployment of dark infrastructure raises many operational and methodological questions and stresses some knowledge gaps that still need to be addressed, such as the exhaustive mapping of light pollution and the characterization of sensitivity thresholds for model species.

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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · 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