Folks oppfatninger rundt jordbrukslandskapet: Om mulig bruk av data fra Norsk Monitor i 3Q-overvåkingsprogrammet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3Q-programmet har overvåket kontinuitet og endringer i arealbruk, kulturminner, biologisk mangfold og tilgjengelighet i jordbrukets kulturlandskap siden 1998. Siden 2019 har NIBIO abonnert på Norsk Monitor (NM), en omfattende, sosiokulturell studie av det norske samfunnet som blir gjennomført annethvert år. Vi presenterer første resultater fra to NIBIO-spesifikke NM-spørsmål om folks oppfatning av henholdsvis jordbrukslandskapet i sin bostedskommune og jordbrukslandskapets funksjoner, og fra et tredje spørsmål om landskapsrelaterte miljøproblemer. Siden den europeiske landskapskonvensjonen inkluderer folks oppfatning i sin omforente definisjon av landskapsbegrepet, foreslår vi å integrere NM-resultater i 3Q-landskapsovervåkingen fremover, og koble resultatene til andre data fra programmet. The 3Q program has monitored continuity and changes
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.009 |
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".