MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064777399 · doi:10.1177/0270467604274358

A Failing Grade for the German End-of-Life Vehicles Take-Back System

2005· article· en· W2064777399 on OpenAlexaff
Nina Nakajima, Willem H. Vanderburg

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare, Law, Governance, and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanEnd-to-end principleValue (mathematics)BusinessEnvironmental economicsTransport engineeringOperations managementComputer scienceEngineeringEconomicsComputer securityGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German end-of-life vehicle take-back system is described and analyzed in terms of its impact on the environment and the car companies involved. It is concluded that although this system is often cited as an example of a successful take-back scheme, it is not one that maximizes the value recovered from end-of-life vehicles. As a result, corporations do not achieve the potential benefits that can be realized from an alternate value chain based on recovering value from end-of-life products. Neither is society benefiting from the potential reduction in pollution and from making its way of life more sustainable. Without bringing these potential benefits to all stakeholders, the system is not likely to have a future.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicHealthcare, Law, Governance, and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207