MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383620377 · doi:10.32388/9v8nm8

Cloud-based geospatial services for building capacity and safeguarding heritage in climatically marginal landscapes

2023· preprint· en· W4383620377 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan S. Lim, Gonzalo Linares Matas, Rachel Smith, Sean Gleason, Lynn Marie Church

Bibliographic record

VenueQeios · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisGeographyClimate changeSafeguardingCloud computingContext (archaeology)Environmental resource managementPopulationPhysical geographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingGeologyOceanographyPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our world is changing rapidly, and nowhere is this transition more pronounced than in the climatic extremes of our planet. For the people who call these places home, the myriad threats facing their rich cultural landscapes in the context of the current climate change crisis—rising sea levels, fluvial erosion, drought, sand dune encroachment—are becoming a source of great social anxiety. Furthermore, these environmental pressures are compounded by population growth and urban development. Using two contrasting study regions, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta in Alaska, USA and Mauritania, we explore how free cloud-based geospatial services such as Google Earth Engine (GEE) might be used to build capacity for communities in the Arctic and the Sahel. We present five analytical remote sensing tools built in GEE, each one designed to address specific and urgent environmental concerns in the regions in question.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQeiosSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207