MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1605166609 · doi:10.5751/es-01811-110150

Generating and Fostering Novelty

2006· article· en· W1605166609 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lance Gunderson, Carl Folke, Marco A. Janssen

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurpriseComputer scienceNoveltySimple (philosophy)Class (philosophy)Redundancy (engineering)Risk analysis (engineering)SimplicityManagement scienceOperations researchArtificial intelligenceEngineeringBusinessSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing social-ecological systems can be daunting because of numeric and dynamic complexity. These complexities present great uncertainties for scientists, policy makers, stakeholders, and other groups. When approaching complicated problems, there are often mismatches between problems and solutions. At least three caricatures are useful in demonstrating the mismatch between problem and solution sets [See ADDENDUM]. For simple problems such as making a meal, a cookbook or recipe approach suffices. Other classes of complex problems are amenable to engineering approaches. For example, building bridges, sending men to the moon, or constructing trustworthy aircraft not only rely on a combination of optimization and efficiency to deal with limited resources but also call for functional redundancy to maintain system stability and reliability. The class of environmental issues and problems discussed in this journal and other outlets is much more complex and subject to true uncertainty and surprise, indeed, much more like raising a child. We argue that this class of problems requires novel approaches, creative combinations of strategies, and the ability to adapt in a changing environment.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0040.015
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicInnovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine SystemsFrench-language works237,207