MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396522573 · doi:10.1139/facets-2023-0167

Cadre législatif québécois pour la protection des espèces sauvages en situation précaire: évaluation critique et recommandations pour une révision majeure

2024· article· en· W4396522573 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Fanie Pelletier, Pierre Dumont, Joanie Van de Walle, Daniel Jauvin, David Rodrigue

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsEcomuseum ZooUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsValuation (finance)Political scienceBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Quebec, the Act Respecting Threatened or Vulnerable species (ARTV), adopted in 1989, aims to safeguard Quebec's wild genetic diversity by protecting species at risk. However, since its implementation about 30 years ago, it has been repeatedly pointed out that the application of the Quebec legislative framework for the protection of wildlife species at risk was often slow and inadequate. The aim of this article is therefore to make a series of observations on the limits of current legislation and then propose nine urgent recommendations to improve the effectiveness of conservation efforts for species at risk in Quebec. Our recommendations aim to increase the efficiency and transparency of the designation process, reconsider compensation mechanisms for the loss of critical habitat, and harmonize species status between the federal and provincial levels. We hope that our article will pave the way for a constructive discussion leading to an improved protection of wildlife species in precarious situations and their persistence for future generations. The English version of this article is available in the Supplementary material file.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207