Research Plan for the Study of Rapid Change, Resilience and Vulnerability in Social-Ecological Systems of the Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"How can research best address the challenges of Arctic sustainability in a world of rapid change? What determines the limitations of adaptation when a system is approaching a critical threshold? What are the social-ecological consequences when critical thresholds are crossed and new conditions emerge? How best do we frame the analysis of vulnerabilities? How can we best structure human institutions and social organization to build resilience and facilitate adaptation in conditions of rapid change? And how should Arctic residents engage in this research? \n \nThese questions reflect a broad set of issues that motivated our group to gather in Vancouver, Canada this past April, 2005, and begin developing an international research plan to explore issues of rapid change and sustainability through an analysis of resilience and vulnerability of Arctic social-ecological systems. We are one of several working groups preparing for the upcoming Second International Conference on Arctic Research Planning (ICARP-2), scheduled to take place in Copenhagen in November 2005. Our draft research plan, modified for this issue of The Digest, is intended to stimulate discussion among the northern researcher community and arctic residents about the key themes worthy of study. \n \n "Our definition of the Arctic is aimed at capturing the social, economic, political, and ecological processes that are critical properties for the functioning of the Arctic System. Thus, we do not limit the definition of Arctic to more restrictive definitions, such as that region north of the Arctic Circle or north of tree line, but view it as a region integrated within the Global System."
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 | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.013 |
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".