MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239665615 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13294

Indigenous Involvement in the Canadian Species at Risk Recovery Process

2018· dissertation· en· W4239665615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cassandra Hill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMinistry of Economy, Trade and Industry
KeywordsIndigenousThreatened speciesAgency (philosophy)GeographyPairwise comparisonBiologyEcologyPsychologySociologyHabitatSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many countries, including Canada, are beginning to officially recognize the vital roles of Indigenous Peoples in threatened species recovery. To determine whether official recognition is translating into actual involvement of Indigenous Peoples in threatened species recovery planning, I examined recovery strategies and management plans for threatened species under the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA). I scored each document for the level of involvement with Indigenous Peoples. I analyzed the data using permutation-based ANOVAs and post hoc pairwise permutation tests to determine the impact of region, taxonomic group, and responsible agency on scores. Fifty two percent of documents suggested no Indigenous involvement, despite a legal requirement to consult.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0070.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.278 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal and Plant Science EducationFrench-language works237,207