Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biodiversity and Protected Areas assembles twelve topics from around the world, illustrating the complexities and promise of addressing the biodiversity crisis. Authors from Mongolia, Africa, India, Canada, Iraq, and the United States dwell on particular aspects and challenges relevant to those regions. Lessons and approaches from interesting localities, coupled with global analyses give the reader a synthetic view of emerging problems. The opportunities for understanding common issues across different geographies abound, such as comparing local conservation in sub-Saharan Africa with a distribution of very small protected areas in Massachusetts. Several topics will be of immediate interest to policymakers. The book is illustrated with numerous color maps and figures and the authors strove for clear, uncomplicated writing. The editors provide an overview of chapters, placing them in the context of other biodiversity and protected area literature. Students and conservationists attempting to broaden their views of biodiversity and protected areas should find this collection to be interesting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.963 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".