MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395683571 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2024.070125

Study on Eco-Management Program of Status of Illegal Trade in Wildlife

2024· article· en· W4395683571 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlife tradeWildlifeBusinessEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental protectionEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is dedicated to exploring the use of the "Satellite + Artificial Intelligence + Blockchain" technology project to effectively reduce the negative impacts of the illegal wildlife trade on global ecosystems, biodiversity economic security, and analysing them through a management perspective. By pre-processing a large amount of data and selecting key sub-indicators in terms of power, resources and benefits, and combining the AHP and CRITIC methods to calculate the weights and composite scores, this study identifies TRAFFIC organisations as the best performing organisations in terms of their commitment to wildlife conservation. Trends in global rainforest area, number of endangered species, and illegal trade cases were analysed using the ARIMA model, revealing a downward trend in the number of investigated cases, while an increase in illegal hunting indicators suggests an intensification of covert operations with insufficient response capacity. Therefore, the Satellite + AI + Blockchain project aims to enhance the management capacity of TRAFFIC organisations to combat illegal wildlife trade.Pearson coefficient analysis revealed a significant negative correlation (-0.973) between the incident detection rate and the actual occurrence of incidents, which was further clarified by linear regression. The likelihood of the project achieving its objectives was calculated to be 95 per cent, supported by relevant literature and model confidence levels. Finally, the study also assessed the strengths and weaknesses of the model, analysed the sensitivity of the detection rate indicator and confirmed the validity of the model assumptions. The critical role of the managerial perspective in project implementation is emphasised by exploring the impact of various aspects of PESTLE on project success.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicRegional Development and EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207