MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412083858 · doi:10.18226/22370021.v14.n2.08

O requisito de anuência prévia do IBAMA para empreendimentos minerários que suprimam vegetação nativa do bioma Mata Atlântica

2024· article· pt· W4412083858 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lucas Fonseca Marinho, Romeu Faria Thomé da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueDireito Ambiental e Sociedade · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGeography and Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas GeraisUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisUniversité Laval
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Atlantic Forest is one of the main and most threatened Brazilian biomes, having been characterized as National Heritage by the Federative Republic of Brazil 1988 Constitution. The protection, conservation, regeneration, and use of Atlantic Forest biome remnants follow strict rules established by Brazilian Federal Law No. 11,428/2006 and Federal Decree No. 6,660/2008. Among these rules, the requirement of prior approval by the Brazilian federal environmental agency, in particular the Brazilian Environment and Human Resources Institute (Ibama), stands out as a condition for the authorization for suppression of Atlantic Forest biome remnants in specific cases. Thus, the main objective of the present study is to analyze which cases Ibama’s prior consent should be required under the terms of Federal Law No. 11,428/2006 and Federal Decree No. 6,660/2008, focusing in whether this requirement should be also applied to mining activities, even if not expressly provided by the said legislation. The methodology adopted was the deductive method based on bibliographic-descriptive research, aiming to gather information about the core problem of the present work. The results achieved allowed us to conclude that there is currently a gap in the legislation regarding whether the Ibama’s consent is mandatory for mining activities that requires suppression of Atlantic Forest remnants. This situation results in two blocks of divergent interpretations by the competent public bodies and the specialized doctrine. Therefore, it seems to us that the ideal solution should necessarily be given by the Legislative Power in order to eliminate said gap in the legislation.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 venueDireito Ambiental e SociedadeSame topicGeography and Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207