MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4245092512 · doi:10.5558/tfc77556-4

PERSPECTIVE

2001· article· en· W4245092512 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As this is my inaugural message as President, I would firstComme il s'agit de mon premier message B titre de prisident, like to thank all of the Executive members with whom I have j'aimerais remercier en premier lieu tous les membres de had the pleasure to work since arriving on the national scene 1'ExCcutifavec lesquels j'ai eu le plaisir de travailler depuis mon back in 1997.This includes those from the Executive Committee, anivk sur la sckne nationale en 1997.Cela comprend les membthe National Board of Directors and, of course, our Executive res du comitC exCcutif, du conseil d'administration national, Director.The vitality and enthusiasm I have witnessed during et bien s b , la diiectrice extcutive.La vitalit6 et l'enthousiasme this time has been unbelievable!The commitment I have wit-dont j'ai Ct C tCmoin au cours de cette pCriode sont incroyables!nessed, and share, relative to CIF/IFC initiatives is unparalleled L'engagement et le partage que j'ai dCnotCs relativement aux in my experience and shows no signs of diminishing.initiatives de 1'Institut sont sans comparaison possible et ne don-This is not to say there is no room for irnprove-nent aucun signe de relbche.ment, nor is it advocating complacency.There Cela ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y a pas de place are opportunities for the CIFflFC to move for-pour I'amClioration, ni qu'il s'agit de complaisward on a number of initiatives, all of which ance.I1 existe des situations oG 1'Institut pourwould serve to strengthen the Institute, as well rait aller de I'avant dans bien des cas, lesquelles as to raise the profile of forestry across the permettraient de renforcer I'Institut, ainsi qu'8 country.In this regard, we are not alone.There relever I'image de la foresterie partout au pays.are other associations, institutes, organizations A cet effet, nous ne somrnes pas seuls.I1 y a and societies with similar goals and objectives.d'autres associations, instituts, organismes et In fact, there are many forest practitioners who socidt6s qui ont des buts et des objectifs similaires support these other organizations through mem-aux n6tres.Dans les faits, plusieurs praticiens bership.de la foresterie appuient ces autres organisations Recognizing this "reality," the CIFIIFC, en y adhCrant en tant que membres.through its Strategic Plan, its Communication Reconnaissant cette "rCalit6", lYInstitut, par Plan and its Business Plan, has for the past few I'entremise de son plan stratkgique, son plan de years, focussed on partnerships as a means of rais-Don Gelinas

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2930.130

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry Chronicle→Same topicForest Management and Policy→French-language works237,207→