MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319789100 · doi:10.1002/env.2787

Environmental data science: Part 1

2023· article· en· W4319789100 on OpenAlex
Andrew Zammit‐Mangion, Nathaniel K. Newlands, Wesley S. Burr

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scienceField (mathematics)Environmental researchComputer scienceFocus (optics)Set (abstract data type)Climate scienceDisciplineEnvironmental dataManagement scienceClimate changeSociologyEnvironmental resource managementMathematicsEcologyEnvironmental scienceSocial scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Environmental data science is a multi‐disciplinary and mature field of research at the interface of statistics, machine learning, information technology, climate and environmental science. The two‐part special issue ‘Environmental Data Science’ comprises a set of research articles and opinion pieces led by statisticians who are at the forefront of the field. This editorial identifies and discusses common strands of research that appear in the contributions to Part 1, which largely focus on statistical methodology. These include temporal, spatial and spatio‐temporal modeling; statistical computing; machine learning and artificial intelligence; and the critical question of decision‐making in the presence of uncertainty. This editorial complements that of Part 2, which largely focuses on applications; see Burr, Newlands, and Zammit‐Mangion (2023).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.019

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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