MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084617461 · doi:10.25674/426

GLOSOB: The Global Soil Biodiversity Observatory

2024· article· en· W7084617461 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of TechnologyWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityConvention on Biological DiversitySoil biodiversityAction planAgricultural biodiversityAgricultureMeasurement of biodiversityEcosystem servicesSoil functions

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the post-2020 Plan of Action of the International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Soil Biodiversity (CBD 2020), adopted at the 2022 Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP15), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) was mandated to implement a global soil biodiversity and ecosystem function monitoring framework. This initiative aligns with past and recent efforts of the FAO’s Global Soil Partnership (GSP) and its recently created International Network on Soil Biodiversity (NETSOB), as well as those from other international initiatives such as the Global Soil Biodiversity Initiative (GSBI) and the global Soil Biodiversity Observation Network (SoilBON). Through these initiatives, participating countries are therefore encouraged to improve their knowledge of soil biodiversity and implement sound policies and actions to prioritize soil biodiversity in National Reports and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.026

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207