MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115038395

Phục hồi rừng Canada: C'n bằng giữa khí hậu, thiên nhiên và con người

2025· article· vi· W7115038395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagevi
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicResearch studies in Vietnam
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Identification (biology)Period (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chương trình Trồng Hai Tỷ Cây (Two Billion Trees - 2BT) đầy tham vọng của Canada không chỉ hướng đến mục tiêu giảm thiểu biến đổi khí hậu, mà còn nhằm bảo vệ đa dạng sinh học và nâng cao chất lượng sống cho con người. Điều đáng chú ý là Canada có tới 19,1 triệu hecta đất phù hợp để phục hồi rừng – gấp 15 lần so với mục tiêu trồng 1,2 triệu hecta. Thách thức vì vậy không nằm ở trồng ở đâu, mà là trồng như thế nào cho hiệu quả.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)Same topicResearch studies in VietnamFrench-language works237,207