Sustainable development of the urban agglomeration through the creation of an urban network of protected areas: case study of Kyiv city urban ecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adams L.W., 1994, Urban wildlife habitats: a landscape perspective, Minneapolis: University Minnesota Press. Adams L.H., Dove L.E., 1989, Wildlife reserves and corridors in the urban environment: a guide to ecological landscape planning and resource conservation, Columbia: National Institute for Urban Wildlife. Anakhov P.V., Kucheryawa I.M., Sorokina N.L., 2018, Use of water resources of Kiev in the past and present, Hydropower of Ukraine, 3-4, 76-80. Batog S.V., 2017, Ecological and hydrological characteristics of Kyiv waters bodies: PhD "esis, Geography. Blair R.B., 2001, Creating a homogeneous avifauna, in: Avian conservation and ecology in an urbanizing world, eds J.M. Marzluff, R. Bowman, R. Donnelly, Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Clergeau P., Mennechez G., Sauvage A., Lemoine A., 2001, Human perception and appreciation of birds: A motivation for wildlife conservation in urban environments of France, in: Avian ecology in an urbanizing world, eds J.M. Marzluff, R. Bowman, R. Donnelly, Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Czech B., Krausman P.R., 1997, Distribution and causation of species endangerment in the United States, Science, 277, 1116-1117. Donnelly R., Marzluff J.M., 2004, Importance of reserve size and landscape context to urban bird conservation, Conservation Biology, 18, 733-745. Ecological passport of Kyiv, 2018, Kyiv: Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine. Edgar D.R., Kershaw G.P., 1994, "e density and diversity of the bird populations in three residential communities in Edmonton, Alberta, Canadian Field-Naturalist, 108, 156-161. Emlen J.T., 1974, An urban bird community in Tucson, Arizona: derivation, structure, regulation, Condor, 76, 184-197. Girault C., 2017, Between naturalness and urbanity, how are protected areas integrated into cities? "e case of Helsinki (Finland), Articulo. Journal of Urban Research, 16, 32-48; DOI: 10.4000/articulo.3270. Lancaster R.K., Rees W.E., 1979, Bird communities and the structure of urban habitats, Canadian Journal of Zoology, 57, 2358-2368. Leedy D.L., Adams L.W., 1984, A guide to urban wildlife management, Columbia: National Institute for Urban Wildlife. Lenzen M., Moran D., Kanemoto K., Foran B., Lobefaro L., A. Geschke, 2010, International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations, Nature, 486, 109-112. Marzluff J.M., Rodewald A.D., 2008, Conserving Biodiversity in Urbanizing Areas: Nontraditional Views from a Bird’s Perspective, Cities and the Environment, 1(2), 1-27. McKinney M.L., 2002, Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation, BioScience, 52, 883- 890. Melles S.J., 2005, Urban bird diversity as an indicator of human social diversity and economic inequality in Vancouver, British Columbia, Urban habitats, 3(1), 25-48. Miller J.R., Hobbs R.J., 2002, Conservation where people live and work, Conservation Biology, 16(2), 24-39. Picke& S.T.A., Cadenasso M.L., Grove J.M., Nilon C.H., Pouyat R.V., Zipperer W.C., Costanza R., 2001, Urban ecological systems: Linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 127-157. Rodary E., Bruno-Lézy L., Dellier J., Guyot S., Landy F., 2018, "e Quest for Naturbanity, in Urban National Parks to Natured Cities in the Global South, Singapore: Springer; DOI: 1-31. 10.1007/978-981-10-8462-1_1. Rosenzweig M.L., 2003, Win-win ecology: How the earth’s species can survive in the midst of human enterprise, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sanderson E.W., Huron A., 2011, Conservation in the City, Conservation Biology, 25(3), 421-423; DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01683.x. Shafer C.L., 1997, Terrestrial nature reserve design at the urban/rural interface, in: Conservation in highly #agmented landscapes, ed. M.W. Schwartz, New York: Chapman and Hall. Shochat E., Lerman S., Fernández-Juricic E., 2010, Birds in urban ecosystems: population dynamics, community structure, biodiversity, and conservation, Urban Ecosystem Ecology, 55, 75-86; DOI:10.2134/agronmonogr55.c4. Soulé M.E., 1991, Land use planning and wildlife maintenance: guidelines for conserving wildlife in an urban landscape, APA Journal Summer, 3, 313-323. Turner W., Nakamura T., Dine&i M., 2004, Global urbanization and the separation of humans from nature, Bioscience, 54(6), 585-590. Vasilyuk O., Kostiushin V., Norenko K., Plyga A., Beautiful E., Kolomytsev G., Faikova M., 2012, Nature reserve fund of Kyiv region, Kyiv: National Ecological Center of Ukraine. World Urbanization Prospects: "e 2018 Revision, 2018, New York: United Nations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".