MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Benefiting Remote Tibetan Communities with Solar Cooker Technology

2007· article· en· W2082520840 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Webb, Kevin Stuart

Bibliographic record

VenuePracticing Anthropology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Interactions Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlateau (mathematics)YAKChinaGeographyCookerWork (physics)LivestockAgroforestrySocioeconomicsEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyForestryEngineeringSociologyAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the remote northwestern Chinese province of Qinghai (Tibetan plateau), the Tibetan people struggle to gather yak dung, wood, straw, and other fuels for heating, boiling, and cooking—the basic necessities for survival. Over the past seven years, extreme cold (-35°C) and drought has had a significant effect on the environment, the Tibetan people, and the livestock and crops upon which these people depend. The environment has become increasingly denuded and many Tibetans, both farmers and herders, are caught in a vicious cycle of destitution. The use of solar cookers as a partial substitute for dung, wood, bushes and straw has helped alleviate this cycle. This paper reports on the accrued benefits to remote Tibetan communities following a program of solar cooker introduction to 48 such recipient communities. Work carried out in 2003 primarily by Tibetan students studying in an English Training Program, at the Qinghai Nationalities Teacher's College, Qinghai Normal University, Xining City, PRC (supported by the Canada Fund) combined with observations over three visits to the region in 2003 and 2004 are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePracticing AnthropologySame topicPlant and Fungal Interactions ResearchFrench-language works237,207