MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546532373 · doi:10.2202/1558-9544.1211

Toxic Choices: The Theory and Impact of Smoking Bans

2011· article· en· W1546532373 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Irvine, Hai V. Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueForum for Health Economics & Policy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantile regressionOrder (exchange)EconomicsSmoking banPublic economicsEconometricsBusinessEnvironmental healthMedicineFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper first proposes a theoretical model of smoker behaviour that serves as a vehicle to evaluate workplace smoking bans. It is a nicotine inventory management model where smoking during one phase of the day impacts utility in other phases. Smoking intensity choice forms part of the optimization. Calibrated model simulations suggest that, with the exception of heavy smokers, workplace bans have small impacts due to substitution possibilities. Quantile regression estimates support the theory. However, restrictions on smoking in the home are an order of greater importance, even when instrumented. The policy conclusion is that workplace ban effectiveness depends heavily upon private choices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForum for Health Economics & PolicySame topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207