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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report is a product of a conference held in Iceland in the spring of 2005. More than 100 people from the five Nordic countries, Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Latvia, Lithuania, Scotland and Canada, participated in the conference discussing national parks, outdoor life and health. Participants came both from the public sector and non-governmental organizations. The conference consisted of sessions with central themes, case studies and group discussion. Great emphasis was put on education and public awareness and on the importance of involving stakeholders and local people in the management of protected areas. There was a clear preference among many participants to protect large contiguous areas, rather than bits and pieces here and there, but within those larger areas there could be different level of protection. The importance of protected areas for public health was also discussed and the need to establish a more active dialogue between those working on public health and those in the field of nature conservation was emphasized. This conference report summarizes the main points of the presentations and gives results from group discussions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it