MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401614653 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2024-2551

Reviews and syntheses: Current perspectives on biosphere research – 2024

2024· preprint· en· W4401614653 on OpenAlexaff
Friedrich J. Bohn, Ana Bastos, Romina Martin, Anja Rammig, Niak Sian Koh, Giles B. Sioen, Bram Büscher, Louise Carver, Fabrice DeClerck, Moritz A. Drupp, Robert Fletcher, Matthew Forrest, Alexandros Gasparatos, Álex Godoy‐Faúndez, Gregor Hagedorn, Martin Hänsel, Jessica Hetzer, Thomas Hickler, Cornelia B. Krug, Stasja Koot, Xiuzhen Li, Amy Luers, Shelby Matevich, H. Damon Matthews, Ina C. Meier, Awaz Mohamed, O Sungmin, David Obura, Ben Orlove, René Orth, Laura Pereira, Markus Reichstein, Lerato Thakholi, Peter H. Verburg, Yuki Yoshida

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosphereClimate changeContext (archaeology)Ecosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementBiodiversityEnvironmental planningResource (disambiguation)BusinessEcosystemPolitical scienceGeographyEcologyEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This review of recent advances in biosphere research aims to provide information on selected issues related to changes in biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, social and economic interactions with ecosystems, and the impacts of climate change on the biosphere. We highlight advances on nine themes that have been recently published in peer-reviewed journals that are gaining importance in the scientific community and have the potential to guide future actions as well as inspire future research questions. Our focus is on the interactions between climate, biosphere and society, and on strategies to sustain, restore or promote ecosystems and their services. While mitigating climate change is expected to reduce many risks and associated costs, rapid emission reductions are also crucial to secure various co-benefits of ecosystems, such as coastal protection or stabilization of regional hydrological cycles. In this context, conservation measures implemented in cooperation with local actors are key to efficient resource allocation. At the same time, holistic action frameworks at the global level are required to guide and support such efforts.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0130.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0810.029

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreReview

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 topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207