MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240324316 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511627217

Machine Learning Methods in the Environmental Sciences

2009· book· en· W4240324316 on OpenAlex
William W. Hsieh

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

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceListing (finance)Artificial intelligenceUploadMachine learningData scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning methods originated from artificial intelligence and are now used in various fields in environmental sciences today. This is the first single-authored textbook providing a unified treatment of machine learning methods and their applications in the environmental sciences. Due to their powerful nonlinear modelling capability, machine learning methods today are used in satellite data processing, general circulation models(GCM), weather and climate prediction, air quality forecasting, analysis and modelling of environmental data, oceanographic and hydrological forecasting, ecological modelling, and monitoring of snow, ice and forests. The book includes end-of-chapter review questions and an appendix listing web sites for downloading computer code and data sources. A resources website containing datasets for exercises, and password-protected solutions are available. The book is suitable for first-year graduate students and advanced undergraduates. It is also valuable for researchers and practitioners in environmental sciences interested in applying these new methods to their own work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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