MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W147233159

The connected world: breaking the rules by working across boundaries for peace, social justice and sustainable enterprise

2008· article· en· W147233159 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Malcolm McIntosh

Bibliographic record

VenueGriffith Research Online (Griffith University, Queensland, Australia) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical economyGlobal warmingBusinessPolitical scienceLaw and economicsPublic relationsInternational tradeClimate changeEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We live in a strange age, in a paradoxical world. On one hand the open society allows information and communication to flow continuously around the world, and enough tariffs have been lowered and trade liberalised for most people to purchase globally traded goods. This world is awash with contact and connectivity. This world is also characterised by the liberal use and abuse of the Earth's energy resources and by surplus food supplies. But in another world about two billion people have not yet made or received a telephone call and many people are denied the two fundamental human rights: freedom from fear and freedom from want. The science of climate change makes it clear, whether we like it or not and whether we agree on how why it has happened, we are on the edge of a fundamental shift in our relationship with the planet. The climate change data is now indisputable, even if the causes of global warming are disputed. Climate change will have a disproportionately a greater effect on the poor but it will affect us all. Through global trade, increased travel and easy communications we also know enough about the world to understand how interdependent we are. Through Roundtables in Sustainable Enterprise we have been reaching across boundaries between people whether they be professional, sectoral, intellectual or cultural. Conversational learning means putting people together who might not normally meet to talk about a given subject. In our case we have brought people together to discuss sustainable enterprise. The composition of our Roundtables is necessarily random and disparate. Since January 2007 we have run eight roundtables in London, Cape Town and Toronto and a conference for 130 people from 19 countries. In all we have involved nearly 200 people.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0250.086
Scholarly communication0.0370.046
Open science0.0030.029
Research integrity0.0120.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGriffith Research Online (Griffith University, Queensland, Australia)Same topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207