MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031205519 · doi:10.7906/indecs.12.1.7

Applying Systems Thinking to Examine and Reduce Dependency on Food Banks

2014· article· en· W2031205519 on OpenAlexaff
Juwaeriah Abdussamad

Bibliographic record

VenueInterdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependency (UML)Systems thinkingComputer scienceManagement scienceRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systems thinking is the art of understanding interconnections between various disciplines thereby unwinding the existing complexity. Most of the real world problems are complex, take for the example the increasing dependency rate on food banks. While various factors contribute towards it, not much has been done to bring the take off the number of dependents. By viewing this system from a holistic systems thinking lens, one explores the issue in depth. We realise the universally acceptable solution is not alleviating the problem in the long run. By applying systems thinking principles several hidden factors are brought to attention and subsequently can be dealt with more aptly. A movement that transcends disciplines results in delivering better solutions.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterdisciplinary Description of Complex SystemsSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207