MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6967770351 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.12749094

A5.1 Report on Protocol for design, implementation and maintenance of NBS for drylands

2024· article· en· W6967770351 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliverableProtocol (science)Action (physics)Work (physics)Adaptive managementDecision support systemInformation system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This document represents the first deliverable of Action A5, due to be delivered in March 2024. Within the framework of the NewLife4Drylands (NL4DL) project, Action A5 aims to define a list of actions (protocol) for the design, implementation, and maintenance of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) in drylands, based on the monitoring model developed in Action A3 and the information gathered from the case studies in Action A4. The establishment of a specific protocol for drylands addressed the lack of tools for practical decision making by administrations in identifying drylands, defining specific actions for restoration, and measuring results. Throughout the project activities (mainly A3, A4, but also A1 and A2), the focus has been placed on the use of Remote Sensing (RS) data, validated by in situ data, to establish a monitoring framework linked to the evaluation of the effectiveness of NBSs at an early stage of the project. The Protocol adapts and elaborates on the international reference documents (i.e. SER, IUCN, and Canadian protected areas), particularly focusing on activities for the restoration of degraded soils using NBS. In addition, the Protocol explores the integrated use of ground-based data (for short-term monitoring) and RS data (for medium- and long-term monitoring) to identify indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of planned solutions. This approach aims to promote adaptive and collaborative management of the ecological restoration process. Therefore, the Protocol acts as a support tool for decision makers, including public administrations of Protected Areas (Pas) management, as well as technicians and planners (such as engineers, architects, agronomists and foresters, geologists, surveyors, etc.); it defines a process that addresses both soil degradation restoration and the medium and long-term monitoring of proposed restoration solutions (NBS). Additionally, it serves as a guide for the identification of specific/local solutions (NBS) for the restoration of drylands, starting with the identification of degradation processes. The comprehensive report provides a detailed account (catalogue) of best practices/solutions (NBS) applicable in similar contexts.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1820.114

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreProtocol

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 venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207