MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283034400 · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2022.05.009

Achieving global biodiversity goals by 2050 requires urgent and integrated actions

2022· article· en· W4283034400 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Leadley, Andrew Gonzalez, David Obura, Cornelia B. Krug, María Cecilia Londoño, Katie L. Millette, Adriana Radulovici, Aleksandar Rankovic, Lynne Shannon, Emma Archer, Frederick Ato Armah, Nicholas J. Bax, Kalpana Chaudhari, Mark J. Costello, Liliana M. Dávalos, Fábio de Oliveira Roque, Fabrice DeClerck, Laura E. Dee, Franz Essl, Simon Ferrier, Piero Genovesi, Manuel R. Guariguata, Shizuka Hashimoto, Chinwe Ifejika Speranza, Forest Isbell, Marcel Kok, Shane Lavery, David Leclère, Rafael Loyola, Shuaib Lwasa, Mélodie A. McGeoch, Akira Mori, Emily Nicholson, José Manuel Ochoa de la Torre, Kinga Öllerer, Stephen Polasky, Carlo Rondinini, Sibylle Schroer, Odirilwe Selomane, Xiaoli Shen, Bernardo B. N. Strassburg, U. Rashid Sumaila, Derek P. Tittensor, Eren Turak, Luis Urbina, María Vallejos, Ella Vázquez‐Domínguez, Peter H. Verburg, Piero Visconti, Stephen Woodley, Jianchu Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Earth · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityWorld Wildlife Fund CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilJarislowsky FoundationMount Allison UniversityMagyar Tudományos AkadémiaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversität ZürichEuropean CommissionAustralian Research CouncilSight Research UKUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsBiodiversityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.007

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations134
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueOne EarthSame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207