MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404523108 · doi:10.5070/p540263635

International Workshop on Indigenous Communities and Government Partnerships for Protected Area Management: Workshop Summary Report

2024· article· en· W4404523108 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueParks Stewardship Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousGovernment (linguistics)Environmental planningPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyBusinessEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Workshop on Indigenous Communities and Government Partnerships for Protected Area Management was held on September 2022 on the homelands of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe. This event, hosted by the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, gathered approximately 55 Indigenous and government representatives from the U.S., Chile, Canada, and Mexico. The Participants represented Indigenous communities, organizations, and Tribal governments involved with marine, coastal, and terrestrial protected areas, as well as federal government representatives selected for their existing relationships with the Indigenous communities and the associated protected areas. The workshop, the first of its kind, was organized to facilitate dialogue among the Indigenous community and government representatives to share their unique experiences, identify and address concerns, and collectively develop recommendations to advance shared governance and collaborative management of protected areas with their respective federal government agencies.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueParks Stewardship ForumSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207