MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Smoking’s Shrinking Geographies

2011· article· en· W2149004016 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeography Compass · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsTobacco controlScholarshipNorm (philosophy)Scale (ratio)DisciplineSociologyPolitical sciencePublic healthGeographySocial scienceMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Smoking bans are the most geographical aspect of contemporary tobacco control policy, and are eliminating smoke from many of the spaces of everyday life, particularly in high‐income countries. In this paper, we emphasize that the adoption of bans both reflects, and reinforces, changing social norms around smoking and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Specifically, as understandings of the health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke have developed, social acceptance of smoking has declined. Bans cement this norm shift by making the behaviour more difficult to perform, relocating smokers to marginal places, and contributing to stigmatization. We draw upon a diverse, multi‐disciplinary scholarship examining contemporary trends in the spatial regulation of smoking. While its focus is on the formal, large‐scale bans implemented by public authorities, increasing attention is now being paid to the myriad small‐scale, voluntary decisions of private actors to limit smoking. As smoking is permitted in ever fewer places, the behaviour is denormalized and its social status markedly eroded.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.224 · 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