MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410404346 · doi:10.17520/biods.2024570

Discussion on the integration path between national parks and territorial space planning and utilization regulation system

2025· article· en· W4410404346 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongqiao Su, Deguang Yu, Mou Kunlun

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Path (computing)Environmental planningGeographyEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & Aims: Land/ocean use change represents the foremost direct driver of global biodiversity loss.Target 1 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework advocates for zero loss of critical ecological regions through comprehensive spatial planning encompassing all areas.The proposal of "establishing and improving a unified and coordinated system for land and space use control and planning permission covering all regions and all types" put forward at the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China provides the best opportunity for implementing Target 1. Challenges: As national parks constitute territorial spaces for biological conservation, their institutional reforms must be thoroughly connected with the territorial space planning and utilization regulation frameworks to efficaciously underpin the conservation of such ecological spaces.Nonetheless, current top-level designs for national park reforms lack explicit integration with these two systems, leading to practical contradictions.Recommendations: It is suggested to fully connect the national park planning system with the five-tiered,•保护与治理对策• 昆蒙框架如何在中国体制下成为主流工作目标专题

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.018
Scholarly communication0.0160.024
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0120.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueBiodiversity ScienceSame topicRegional Development and EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207