MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321238839 · doi:10.1002/env.2788

Environmental data science: Part 2

2023· article· en· W4321238839 on OpenAlexafffund
Wesley S. Burr, Nathaniel K. Newlands, Andrew Zammit‐Mangion

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaTrent University
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsData scienceField (mathematics)Environmental researchComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)DisciplineEnvironmental dataSampling (signal processing)Citizen scienceManagement scienceEngineering ethicsSociologyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceMathematicsSocial 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 research themes that appear in the contributions to Part 2, which focuses on applications. These include spatio‐temporal modeling; the problem of aggregation and sparse sampling; the importance of community‐building and training for the next generation of specialists in environmental data science; and the need to look forward at the challenges that lie ahead for the discipline. This editorial complements that of Part 1, which largely focuses on statistical methodology; see Zammit‐Mangion, Newlands, and Burr (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.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.019

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.237
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

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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207