MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168270224 · doi:10.1002/sres.2310

Meta-Framework for Security in the Human Hive: Integrally Aligning Sustainability Responses to Trajectory of Evolutionary Threats

2014· article· en· W2168270224 on OpenAlexaff
Marilyn Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueSystems Research and Behavioral Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental, Ecological, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman securityContext (archaeology)AKASustainabilitySociologyEnvironmental resource managementEconomic geographyEcologyComputer scienceGeographySocial scienceEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores human security (HS) in the city (aka human hive) within the context of environmental change and proposes an integrated evolutionary framework for designing city-scale HS systems. It explores the integral city framework for HS and the environmental change in the Cosmosphere, Biosphere and Anthroposphere. Four maps reveal how humans in the city impact global environment and how HS is tightly bound with global evolution and human change. Elements of the maps include subjective/intersubjective and objective/interobjective perspectives, nested holarchies of whole systems, fractal development of holons and social holons and eight levels of complex structures. The article concludes that the integral city meta-framework provides a HS system approach that is fractal, scaleable, global, local, holistic, comprehensive, pluralistic, interconnected, evolutionary and developmental. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.223
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystems Research and Behavioral ScienceSame topicEnvironmental, Ecological, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207