Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Convention on Biological Diversity is the key global instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources. Through a globally agreed target aimed to reduce the loss of biodiversity the Convention promotes the maintenance of healthy ecosystems, the protection of threatened species and the conservation of the genetic material that underpins populations of wild and domesticated species. Increasingly, nongovernmental organizations, civil society groups and indigenous and local communities work through the Convention to urge countries to live up to their commitments and to support them, for example in the establishment and effective management of protected area networks. As population growth and economic pressures enlarge humanity's ecological footprint it remains to be seen whether the Convention is an effective tool for conserving the beauty, diversity and inspiring nature of our living environment for future generations to enjoy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.016 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".