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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely understood that anthropogenic environmental change has great potential to adversely affect human health. But the processes and pathways leading to illness are often (at least initially) poorly understood, which makes calls for reversing behavior that causes environmental change difacult. Yet despite the ever-present risk of confounding those they seek to persuade, scholars and activists from a broad range of disciplines and issue areas are nevertheless increasingly framing environmental issues in public health terms. Can concern over adverse health outcomes attributed to human activities be an effective motivator for social change? If so, can such concern catalyze changes within institutions charged with managing human-environmental interaction? The three books reviewed in this essay suggest three conclusions. The arst is that concern for public health is indeed an effective catalyst for initiating debate on environmental issues. Second, framing environmental change through its health consequences depends on analysis from a range of disciplines, which runs the risk of confusing, instead of convincing, target audiences. Third, despite the inherent analytical complexity, concern for public health will increasingly be used to justify attempts to radically alter the governance of human-environmental interactions. Framing adverse anthropogenic environmental change as a public health threat featured prominently in early inouential work associated with the emergence of environmentalism as a social movement oriented towards institutional change. While Silent Spring is best remembered for illustrating how indiscrimi-
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it