Initiatives of Global Cities in Environmental Sustainability: A Case of London and New York City
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
As global cities are the financial centers of globalized economy, they have attained much attention from global communities concerning local initiatives on environmental sustainability. Many global cities are vulnerable to global warming and adversities of climate change. In the United States, many cities and local government, including New York City, are taking their own initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emission, whereas European cities are built historically with compact nature which is more sustainable. This study conducts a comparative analysis on local sustainability policies in New York City and London and focuses on the efficiencies of the initiatives taken by these cities. The comparative analysis reveals that there are more similarities than differences between London and New York City in regards to sustainability goals. However, approaches toward achieving sustainability goals are different in London and New York City due to dissimilarities in geography, local cultures, and diverse environmental politics. In conjunction with the government regulations, behavioral change of the citizens is also pivotal for achieving sustainability outcomes in global cities.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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