MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062443266

The Tragedy of the Commons Revisited: A Note on Plagues and Pestilences and the Canada Goose

2002· report· en· W7062443266 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University) · 2002
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy of the commonsCommonsGovernment (linguistics)PopulationResource (disambiguation)Tragedy (event)WishCullingIncentive
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"We wish to raise a new wrinkle to CPR theory. We wish to extend the logic to resources that people/potential harvesters regard as having negative value, but from which withdrawals are not possible. There are rules that prevent people from eliminating common pool bads of opposed to goods and the stock of the resource quality can actually increase in the commons' situations. Our case in point is the resource of Canada geese which have become an urban, non-migratory pest or plague in many North American sites....We will describe the problem in Southern Ontario and the solutions ultimately worked out to accomodate the common pool. First, we will outline the theoretical extension before we examine the empirical case. We show how the non-market values associated with a non-renewable resource like the Canada geese can gradually be reduced and outweighed by the negative consequences of population increases. We also show how government authorities have continued to restrict culling and harvesting despite supportive evidence, including public opinion. We conclude that the classic tragedy of the commons has an inverse logic whereby limits to harvesting create incentives for the growth of pestilences and plagues particularly in urban areas where carrying capacities appear large."

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University)Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207