MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W55494061

Modeling and mapping in support of the Regional conservational Strategy Framework

2013· article· en· W55494061 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePDXScholar (Portland State University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessProcess management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to November 2010, when The Intertwine Alliance launched the Regional Conservation Strategy (RCS) and Biodiversity Guide (RBG) efforts for the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan region, conservation priorities in the metropolitan region were identified at a broad regional scale that generally excluded urban areas (e.g., state conservation strategies and Willamette Synthesis); were regional but based solely on expert opinion (e.g., Natural Features); and consisted of localized priorities that abruptly ended at jurisdiction boundaries. The goal of the RCS was to fill in the gaps between broad and local scales of information related to conservation priorities. RCS members envisioned a data-driven approach that could add a regional perspective to local efforts and facilitate cross-scale cooperation toward protecting remaining valuable habitat in the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan region. Also, RCS members expected that the product would complement rather than replace local knowledge, by validating what we know and expanding to areas we know less well. In June 2011, INR completed an initial proof-of-concept product describing high value conservation areas in the Portland-Vancouver region. The product demonstrated a methodology that enabled stakeholder involvement while also being data-driven. In September 2012, we completed a second version of this product that is reported on in this document. While the product is considered complete at this time, it is expected and hoped that the models and data will be updated and improved upon into the future as more and better information becomes available so that the product functions as a "living work" rather than a one-time snapshot in time. Several key products resulted from the project: the High Value Habitat data describing high value terrestrial habitat within the metropolitan region, the Riparian Habitat data describing high value habitat adjacent to streams and rivers, and the high spatial resolution land cover data set describing land cover at a 5 m spatial resolution.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.165 · 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