MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1503929069

IT Waste Management in Canada: From Cost Recovery to Resource Conservation?

2006· article· en· W1503929069 on OpenAlexaffabout
Meinhard Doelle

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtended producer responsibilityElectronic wasteResource recoveryBusinessWaste managementResource (disambiguation)Solid waste managementMunicipal solid wasteResource management (computing)Environmental planningNatural resource economicsEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEconomicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The volume, composition and management of solid waste generated by households, governments, the commercial sector, and industry have all changed dramatically over the past century. Household waste contained mainly organic material a hundred years ago. Today, both residential and commercial waste is a complex mix of organics, plastics, paper products, metals and a variety of toxic material. Historically, individual households looked after their own waste, through efforts such as composting and burning. Over the past century, with significant increases in volume of waste generated, municipalities have taken over primary responsibility for solid waste management, initially mainly for aesthetic and sanitary reasons. Environmental considerations only relatively recently factored into waste management strategies, particularly in North America. This article explores the implications of a growing component of waste generated in Canada, waste from electronic equipment such as computers, televisions, and cell phones.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207