MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115725663 · doi:10.36967/2315986

Climate Sensitivities of National Parks in the Rocky Mountains

2025· report· W7115725663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Park Service · 2025
Typereport
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeNational parkVulnerability (computing)Visitor patternResource (disambiguation)Effects of global warmingNatural resource

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National Park Service units across the United States have been affected by climate change, and impacts are expected to intensify. Understanding the vulnerability of park resources, assets, and values to climate change is critical for effective and adaptive park management. Climate change vulnerability is a result of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. This report provides information on climate sensitivity: the degree to which changes in climate drivers affect a resource, asset, or value, either adversely or beneficially. Here, we present regional-scale information for an area congruent with the Rocky Mountain and Greater Yellowstone Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Networks, which encompasses areas from southern Colorado to the Montana–Canadian border. We provide regional trends for past, present, and projected future climate drivers, including gradual changes and extreme events. We then summarize the impacts of these climate trends on natural resources, cultural resources, visitor experience, and infrastructure. Throughout the report, we include park-specific examples illustrating sensitivities and their implications for park management. The purpose of this report series is to document current understanding of key climate trends and resource sensitivities to inform park management decisions and provide information that can be readily incorporated into planning.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 venueNational Park ServiceFrench-language works237,207