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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.053
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