Research for Mitigating Syndromes of Global Change: Research for Mitigating Syndromes of Global Change. A Transdisciplinary Appraisal of Selected Regions of the World to Prepare Development-Oriented Research Partnerships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Annex 2 List of Abbreviations 459North-South perspectives responsibilities within the SPSP, although some remained sceptical about the outcome of parliamentary negotiations and the decisions expected in the June session of the Swiss Parliament.When both chambers of Parliament approved funding for the NCCR North-South in June 2001, three of the eight regional workshops had already taken place; three more were scheduled for July, and two for August.The remaining workshops were held with a great sense of relief and dedication.Three quarters of the participants in each workshop were from the proposed JACS regions, and only one quarter from Switzerland.Thus it was finally possible to redress the earlier imbalance in preparing the proposal by clearly involving all partners in joint design of a research programme.The primary aim of the present publication is to present the results of these workshops, give an overall picture of the SPSP, and introduce the NCCR North-South.The editors, authors and heads of NCCR North-South projects would like to acknowledge the special efforts made by the many contributors to the SPSP and to this publication.First and foremost, this project would not have been possible without the keen and dedicated support of Dr. Daniel Maselli, then working at SDC and serving as a delegated representative to KFPE.Without his persistent encouragement, it is unlikely that we would have summoned the energy to initiate this project.Our thanks go in equal measure to Dr. Urs Christ, who played a similar role within the SNSF.All organisers and participants at the workshops, in Switzerland and in all JACS regions worldwide, were deeply engaged throughout the process; their names are listed in Annex 1 of this publication.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".