MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2230084392 · doi:10.1080/08109028.2015.1095979

Patterns of innovative outputs across climate zones: the geography of innovation

2015· article· en· W2230084392 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mario Coccia

Bibliographic record

VenuePrometheus · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArizona State UniversityGeorgia Institute of TechnologyMaastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology, United Nations UniversityUniversity of TorontoYale University
KeywordsTemperate climateHuman capitalAdaptation (eye)Natural (archaeology)Climate changeEconomic geographyOrder (exchange)Process (computing)Technological changeEnvironmental resource managementGeographyBusinessEcologyComputer scienceEconomicsEconomic growthBiologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological innovation is a vital human activity that interacts with geographic factors and the natural environment. The purpose of the present study is to explain the relationship between climate zones and innovative outputs in order to detect factors that can spur technological change and, as a consequence, human development. The findings show that innovative outputs are high in geographical areas with temperate climate. In effect, warm temperate climates are an appropriate natural environment for humans that, by an evolutionary process of adaptation and learning, create complex societies, efficient institutions and communications systems. This socio-economic platform supports the efficient use of human capital and assets that induce inventions, innovations and their diffusion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations59
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrometheusSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207