MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931963323 · doi:10.5446/58598

“Don’t Lose Your Way”: How 4000 volunteers found 50,000 miles of lost historic paths in England and Wales using OSGeo technology

2021· other· en· W6931963323 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTIB KMO / FLOWWORKS GmbH · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Government (linguistics)Geospatial analysisWeb siteSquare (algebra)Set (abstract data type)Quarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Across the UK there are a network of footpaths and bridleways on which members of the public are free to walk, accessing some of the country’s most beautiful landscapes and places of historic interest. However, thousands of miles of historic paths were missed when the UK’s definitive “rights of way” map was first created in the 1950’s. The UK Government has set a deadline of 2026 when applications for them to be reinstated will close, and they will be lost forever. In 2020, the Ramblers, a UK walking charity, embarked on a crowd source campaign to find, map and save these historic paths. Using a web application built with OS-Geo tech, around 4000 members of the public undertook a “spot the difference” comparison of every square kilometre of England and Wales, comparing the historic maps with those published today. A remarkable 50,000 miles of paths were found across the country, generating significant interest in the UK media. The project is now moving on to the next stage of building up supplementary historic evidence to support applications for their reinstatement. In this talk and interactive demonstration by the Ramblers and their geospatial partner Astun Technology, we will look at the background of the project, the technical solution, the results and what happens next. If you love the outdoors, historic maps and OSGeo technology including PostGIS and OpenLayers, and want to find out about an ancient route called the Fosse Way, then this is the talk for you! During the talk we will include a presentation of the project and also a live demonstration of how OSGeo technology was used to map our historic path network. You will discover more about the project, get to see some beautiful historic maps of England and Wales, and understand how OSGeo technology made the project a reality. Requirements for the Attendees – None Track – Use cases & applications Topic – FOSS4G implementations in strategic application domains: land management, crisis/disaster response, smart cities, population mapping, climate change, ocean and marine monitoring, etc. Level – 1 - Principiants. No required specific knowledge is needed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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 venueTIB KMO / FLOWWORKS GmbHFrench-language works237,207