MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4233860179 · doi:10.24124/2020/59128

Climate change-conscious systematic conservation planning: A case study in the Peace River Break, British Columbia

2020· dissertation· en· W4233860179 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jerrica Mann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeBiodiversityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBiodiversity conservationGeographyHabitat fragmentationConservation biologyEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The synergistic effects of anthropogenic disturbance, habitat fragmentation and climate change pose a significant threat to biodiversity that is challenging to predict. Anthropogenically driven climate change has already begun to impact critical climate regions and is now recognized to be one of the most serious threats to biodiversity and the conservation thereof. Despite this, few conservation planning initiatives have sought to sharpen the focus of the systematic conservation planning (SCP) framework to explicitly include climate change. To promote the evolution of the SCP framework into a climate change-conscious (CCC) approach to conservation planning, I developed and applied a methodology for incorporating climatechange resiliency into the SCP framework. This CCC-SCP methodology can be used to guide future conservation planning initiatives, helping conservation planners recognize and respond to opportunities for action, conserve our planet’s biodiversity and mitigate the effects of climate change.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0220.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→