MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005032829 · doi:10.1002/csr.124

Sustainable development indicators for the transmission system of an electric utility

2006· article· en· W2005032829 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cory Searcy, Daryl McCartney, Stanislav Karapetrović

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProcess (computing)Performance indicatorKey (lock)Sustainable developmentProcess managementBusinessEnvironmental economicsSustainabilityComputer scienceEnvironmental resource managementMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a system of sustainable development indicators for the transmission system of a Canadian electric utility. The indicators were developed based on extensive consultations with internal experts at the case utility and external experts in the field of sustainable development indicators. A total of 98 indicators were incorporated into the system, with 70 being developed as a part of this process and 28 representing indicators previously developed by the company. Recognizing the difficulty of working with nearly 100 unstructured measures, four techniques were used to increase the utility of the indicators: (1) the indicators were clustered around eight key priority areas, (2) the indicators were organized according to a hierarchical approach linked to the business planning process, (3) the process of integrating the indicators with existing corporate initiatives was staggered over time and (4) a tiered aggregate was developed. The process of developing the indicators is discussed, with key lessons learned emphasized throughout the paper. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental ManagementSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207