The sustainability of the UBC Food System Collaborative Project III : food security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our group has been assigned the task of developing a definition of food security for the UBC campus, given that it is of the utmost importance for UBC to strive towards sustainability. In order to effectively carry out this assignment, we have designed a model of sustainability that reflects our problem definition, value assumptions, and chosen economic, ecological, and social indicators. We have selected our economic indicator to measure the difference in cost between nutritious foods found on-campus with those same foods found off-campus. Our ecological indicator of choice is food mileage, which will be measured through the Weighted Average Source Distance method. We have also developed a questionnaire for our social indicator that will measure the perceived availability, acceptability, and accessibility of food to those who access the UBC Food Supply the most: students, permanent residents, faculty, and staff. Our group has also investigated the possible differences between food security as it pertains to students in residence and food security for people who live off campus. This led us to inquire further about the role that AMS Food Services, UBC Food Services, and other stakeholders, play in campus food security. Lastly, we have reviewed recent developments on food policy within the City of Vancouver and the work conducted on food security at UBC by previous groups of students in the Land, Food and Community courses within the Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, and provided recommendations for further action and research in the UBC Food System Project. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".