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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1620.022

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; 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 designObservational
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