Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vivir en armonía con la naturaleza. Esta es la visión compartida por todas las partes integrantes del Convenio de la Diversidad Biológica (CDB), es decir, la práctica totalidad de los Estados mundiales. Dicha visión, que se ratificó en la COP15 (2021-2022) con la adopción del Marco Global Kunming-Montreal, nace con el objetivo de lograr que en el año 2050 la crisis de pérdida de biodiversidad sea tan solo un mal recuerdo, y que nuestra sociedad haya aprendido a habitar este planeta garantizando la conservación de la naturaleza. Se trata de una visión noble, pero también necesaria. El descontrolado proceso de destrucción de hábitats naturales y la extracción insaciable de recursos necesarios para alimentar la maquinaria de un sistema capitalista depredador, basado en la falsa doctrina del crecimiento ilimitado, están llevando al límite la capacidad de la Tierra para sostener la vida. El colapso de los ecosistemas es una amenaza inminente, considerando que su degradación se está acelerando a un ritmo mucho mayor del que estaba previsto (Willcock et al., 2023). La conservación de la biodiversidad es un asunto de vida o muerte.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".