MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409697352 · doi:10.7202/1117575ar

Corridor nature de la rivière Noire : quand conservation et plein air jouent de concert

2025· article· fr· W4409697352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yasmine Kessaci, Alexandre Fréchette, Marie-Pierre Thibeault, Marie-Pierre Beauvais

Bibliographic record

VenueLe Naturaliste canadien · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans Lanaudière, un partenariat inédit s’est formé entre un organisme de loisir et une fiducie de conservation. Leur objectif est de baliser et de mettre en place un corridor naturel de 21 000 ha sur le territoire de la MRC de Matawinie pour y permettre des activités de plein air à faible incidence et la protection concomitante de la faune et de la flore. Le tracé proposé pour le futur Corridor nature de la rivière Noire couvre l’essentiel du cours d’eau, tout en reliant 2 parcs régionaux, celui des Chutes-Monte-à-Peine-et-des-Dalles, au sud, et celui des Sept-Chutes, au nord. Avant l’amorce du projet, un peu plus de 4 500 ha y étaient déjà sous protection perpétuelle, un atout de taille pour consolider des superficies en conservation et maintenir la qualité des paysages. La tenure mixte des terres (publiques au nord ; privées au sud), de même qu’une forte adhésion des élites politiques locales étaient aussi des prémisses d’importance pour y réaliser un projet-pilote novateur. Depuis son lancement, 239 ha ont été ajoutés pour la conservation dans la portion privée du corridor. À terme, les 2 organismes impliqués visent à mettre en conservation 3 000 ha supplémentaires de manière à atteindre 37 % du territoire visé.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLe Naturaliste canadienSame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207