MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167115658 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.683

Public Preferences to CCS: How does it Change Across Countries?

2013· article· en· W2167115658 on OpenAlex
Peta Ashworth, Edna Einsiedel, Rhys Howell, S. Brunsting, Naomi Boughen, Amanda D. Boyd, Simon Shackley, B. van Bree, Talia Jeanneret, Karen Stenner, Jennifer Medlock, Leslie Mabon, C.F.J. Feenstra, M. Hekkenberg

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeContext (archaeology)Process (computing)Political sciencePublic policyPublic relationsRegional scienceGeographyEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to extend an Australian developed large group process which proved effective in engaging the general public on issues related to climate change, energy technologies, and the overall shift towards a low carbon society. The results from Australia, the Netherlands, Canada and Scotland found that in each of the geographic locations the context varied, and participants reported different experiences and understanding of each topic. This paper explores how context may have impacted on the results, the differences that arise and discusses the implications for policy makers and research developers.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.241 · 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