MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097116191

PA TH W A Y

2016· article· en· W7097116191 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClubWhite (mutation)Session (web analytics)Plan (archaeology)Test (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The calm exterior of the little white building on the edge of the park belies the bluster of activity underway inside. It is 9:30 on a Saturday morning in December, and boys and girls aged 8 to 10 are fi nding tasks with which to busy themselves: updating nature journals, fl ipping through new books, feeding Houdini (our red-eared slider turtle) or simply chatting with each other. One boy is eagerly recounting the various birds he’s spotted in the last two weeks. Jon, the group’s leader, calls the Nature Centre’s familiar “chick-a-dee-dee-dee” attention-getter, and soon everyone is seated on the fl oor. First order of business: trivia! The topic of the day is squirrels and the children have come prepared with questions to test their peers. The respect and attention these young nature enthusiasts give one another is impressive. Everyone listens intently, waits their turn and offers kudos for a right answer or an especially interesting question. Once quizzed out, topographic maps are consulted to plan a hiking route. Suggestions for sites to visit are put forth — among them, notably, one of the park’s big hills. It is, after all, the fi rst snow of the year, and at least some sliding between squirrel observations is a must. With excitement mounting and winter gear applied, the group starts out on the trails, “nature voices ” dialled to low, clutching scavenger hunt sheets. Welcome to a typical session of the Ramblers Hiking Club for Kids, run out of the High Park Nature Centre in Toronto’s west end. Most members are seasoned veterans of the Nature Centre’s programs, and well acquainted with both the park’s many nature trails and each other. They have participated in clubs, camps, family events and school trips, and have become caretakers, explorers and admirers of the park’s natural beauty throughout the seasons. As a nature interpreter who has had the pleasure to teach, learn from and explore with many people of all ages, it is clear to me that these young people represent among the best hope for the future of a valuable natural place in the heart of the City of Toronto that is constantly

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5930.439

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Green Space and Health→French-language works237,207→