MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925257526 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/28ua4

Identifying Differences in Roadless Areas in Canada Based on Global, National, and Regional Road Datasets

2021· article· en· W6925257526 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingFootprintScale (ratio)Identification (biology)Geographic information systemSpatial analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Roads are an overwhelming component of the global human footprint and their absence helps identify intact areas with high ecological value. Such areas are decreasing globally, making accurate estimation of their location and area of great importance. As the world’s second largest country, Canada contains a high proportion of the planet's remaining undisturbed areas. Identification of road-free regions requires accurate data, but substantial variability exists in road network datasets created and maintained at different spatial scales. We compared estimates of road length, density, and roadless areas across Canada, finding that global and national scale datasets included far fewer roads than regional-scale data or volunteered geographic information (VGI), with pronounced differences in less-developed areas. Regional-scale datasets had the lowest estimates of roadless area and smallest mean roadless patch size and are likely the most complete road maps, but are not available for all jurisdictions, limiting their national scale utility. VGI provides a national-scale alternative but still lacks many low-use roads. Available global and national datasets have insufficient information for accurate assessments of roadless areas in Canada, which will require detailed, consistent subnational datasets assembled and maintained by each province and territory in a coordinated fashion to achieve national coverage.

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)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)Same topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207