MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4246914235 · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.146644

Ecosystem goods and services assessment - southern Alberta : phase 2 report - version 2 : conceptual linkages and initial assessment /

2007· book· en· W4246914235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcosystem servicesEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementGoods and servicesPhase (matter)GeographyConceptual frameworkEnvironmental planningEcologyEnvironmental scienceEconomicsEconomySociologyBiologyChemistrySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Information presented in this document has been compiled and interpreted exclusively for the purposes of Alberta Environment by Integrated Environments (2006) Ltd. (I EL), according to conditions specified by contract.IEL has exercised reasonable care, skill and due diligence to assess the data and information reviewed during the preparation of this report, but makes no specific warranties or guarantees regarding the completeness and accuracy of this information.The contents of this report are based on, and limited by, the circumstances and conditions stated herein and upon publicly accessible information available at the time of its completion.The opinions, recommendations and guidance expressed in report are based on the information reviewed and professional expertise.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

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