MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392856957 · doi:10.32920/25417381.v1

Wildlife Crossing Infrastructure for a Green Recovery: Emerging Opportunities for Innovation in Post-COVID-19 Recovery Efforts

2024· preprint· en· W4392856957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Victoria Blake

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeBusinessResilience (materials science)PrioritizationGreen infrastructureEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Scale (ratio)GeographyNatural resource economicsEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While roads are an essential part of modern life, they fragment habitats and landscapes. The effectiveness of wildlife crossing infrastructure (WCI) in reducing wildlife-vehicle collisions and reconnecting landscapes across roads are well documented in scientific literature, along with many other co-benefits. However, WCI projects are not implemented on a national scale in the US or Canada, in part due to lack of funding prioritization. This study undertook a thematic review of the US and Canadian infrastructure and spending plans to identify emerging opportunities for landscape connectivity and green infrastructure projects. The potential for co-locating WCI with active transportation uses was then explored in greater detail through an integrative literature review. WCI projects can contribute to national goals of climate resilience, economic recovery, and closing the infrastructure gap. However, positioning projects for funding will require strategic communication of the co-benefits of connected landscapes that align with national funding goals.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0170.010
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207