MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162069098 · doi:10.82308/7722

Integrating land use and land cover change simulations, stakeholder understanding of the landscape, and connectivity modelling: a case study in the Montérégie region in southern Québec

2021· dissertation· en· W7162069098 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Valentin Lucet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand useLand coverLandscape connectivityContext (archaeology)Land-use planningStakeholderPrioritizationWork (physics)Identification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connectivity conservation science, whose goal is to preserve the continuity of habitat throughout a given landscape, proceeds by identifying priority areas given the current configuration of the landscape. However, current connectivity conservation planning methods often do not take into account risks associated with future land use and climate change, and often do not confront the results of the prioritization process with the priorities perceived by stakeholders. In this thesis, we show solutions to those two issues in the context of an ongoing effort of connectivity conservation planning for the region of Montérégie in Southern Québec, Canada. In the first chapter, we built on past work of connectivity modelling using circuit theory in the region and complemented it with land use and climate change modelling that uses a combination of statistical modelling and MCMC-based simulations. Models trained on past land use data were used to project future land use changes and estimate future changes in potential functional connectivity for 5 different umbrella species. In a second chapter, we integrated these results with the perceived conservation priorities in the region. We conducted a day-long workshop with stakeholders involved in the ongoing connectivity conservation planning effort in the region and collected information on landscape features considered as priority areas for connectivity. We translated these results into simple conservation scenarios. We showed the importance of considering land use changes to produce a resilient network of protected areas and highlight the need for a multi-stakeholder approach in the definition of conservation scenarios and the identification of regional priorities

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.118 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207