MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981805243

Federal Land Ownership: Current Acquisition and Disposal Authorities

2007· report· en· W6981805243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2007
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Park ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAustralian Government
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Current (fluid)Quarter (Canadian coin)Land useWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The federal government owns about 653 million acres, heavily concentrated in 12 western states.Four agencies -the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land Management, all in the Department of the Interior, and the U.S. Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture -administer about 95% of those lands.This report describes the primary federal land acquisition and disposal authorities of these agencies, as background for congressional consideration of measures to acquire or dispose of particular land and to establish new authorities or amend or terminate existing ones.Congress faces questions on the adequacy of existing authorities, the extent and location of their use, the amount of land in federal ownership overall, and the sources and adequacy of funds for land acquisition, among other issues.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207