MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053693142 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v1-n4-464-475

Examples of solid waste analysis and characterization in accordance with contemporary european environmental legislation

2006· article· en· W2053693142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. Karagiannidis, Maria Chrysochoou, Ν. Moussiopoulos, Z. Zamaras, P. Rakibey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationMunicipal solid wastePlan (archaeology)Waste managementWaste disposalEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)Radioactive wasteBusinessEnvironmental scienceEngineeringLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

European legislation specifies a series of analyses that have to be conducted in order to determine indicators on waste generation, treatment and disposal, as well as to ensure that the latter takes place in ways that ensure the protection of human health and environment.These analyses include sampling surveys in selected areas, determination of physicochemical and biological characteristics of waste, as well as the testing of material streams deriving from waste treatment and disposal.Waste characterization is not only directly imposed by European legislation, but is also indirectly required in order to plan and operate waste treatment facilities in a secure and cost-effective manner.This paper discusses the analyses imposed by legislation and the entire frame of analyses performed on waste, accompanied by examples and results that were derived in the frame of specific research projects, as well as their potential applications.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207