MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7025335937

Walking Potatoes & Wilder-Beasts: An Examination Of The Socio-Ecological Relationship Between Humans And Mammals In Urban Agriculture

2024· other· en· W7025335937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman–wildlife conflictWildlifeUrban agricultureAgricultureWork (physics)Urban ecologyUrban communityUrban environmentUrban area
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project explores the positive and negative interactions and conflicts that arise between the people and mammals working, visiting, and living in urban farms and community gardens. This involved an anonymous survey of people that work and grow in the research sites, and the use of trail cameras to capture the mammals that visited the sites. The study examined two urban agricultural sites from August to November 2022, in Toronto, ON: one urban farm and one community garden, both with proximity to urban wildlife habitat. Growers have a complicated, nuanced relationship with the various species living in and benefitting from these miniature agricultural landscapes. Trail cameras at both sites captured numerous species, as well as several individuals who made repeated visits. Conflicts at both sites arose from the eating and spoiling of crops, and damage to infrastructure by wildlife, but some participants felt positively about their interactions with some species.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207