MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400891978 · doi:10.3126/mef.v14i01.67896

Protecting Nepal’s Biodiversity in the Context of Sustainable Development Goal 15

2024· article· en· W4400891978 on OpenAlexaff
Frances R Berardino, Christine A. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueMolung Educational Frontier · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityContext (archaeology)Sustainable developmentEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessNatural resource economicsGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With high elevations and a variety of ecosystem classifications ranging from wetlands to alpine regions, Nepal is one of Earth’s most ecologically diverse countries. However, with global trends of declining biodiversity, Nepal’s ecological diversity is also at risk. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a set of 17 global goals created in the hopes of developing our planet for the betterment of both people and the planet. SDG 15 – Life on Land focuses specifically on protecting the land we live on and the non-human world. Considering Nepal’s high biodiversity, it is essential to protect biodiversity for both the Nepali people and the global community at large. Nepal has made a bold commitment to fulfilling SDG 15, including designating vast areas as protected areas and employing community-based conservation strategies and community based approaches. The following paper is a narrative review of empirical-based literature focused on understanding the complex landscape of biodiversity in Nepal and the implications for achieving SDG 15.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 venueMolung Educational FrontierSame topicSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyFrench-language works237,207