MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020328064 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v9-n6-794-811

Waste indicators of primary sector and health & veterinary services for regional planning

2014· article· en· W2020328064 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eva Cifrián, L. Pérez, Elena Dosal, Javier R. Viguri, A. Andrés

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessEnvironmental planningVeterinary medicineEnvironmental resource managementMedicineEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When there is a need to move smoothly and effectively from an abundance of detailed fi eld data to summarized information, indicators and indices are used.Indicators are important tools that assist decision-makers in formulating and implementing plans for the management of waste at different geographic levels.In Cantabria, a northern Spanish region, all waste streams generated are covered through four specifi c Waste Plans recently adopted.The present study is focused on the Primary Sector, Health & Veterinary Services Waste Plan (PHWP), which is the framework to the decision-making processes related to the generation and management of forest, agricultural, livestock, food industry and health & veterinary wastes.In this work, 16 indicators have been proposed to track the evolution over time of the management of these waste streams in the region and the degree of achievement of the policy objectives.This article discusses the way to obtain, analyse and evaluate valuable information to build the indicators, fi nding that only eight indicators can be applied at short term.In addition, a summary of these indicators is included, showing in general, a good trend of the evolution of primary sector, health & veterinary waste management.Finally, different actions to improve the quality of data used for the indicators development are proposed in order to obtain more useful waste indicators to the stakeholders.

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)0.006
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0180.027
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicFood Waste Reduction and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207