MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410104105 · doi:10.14288/1.0103531

Recycling contamination in the North Shore

2011· article· en· W2410104105 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olga Fedianina

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContaminationShoreEnvironmental scienceGeologyOceanographyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human population and innovative technologies are increasing, creating growing waste in landfills. However, some waste products can be recycled and are recycled around the world. There are certain guidelines on proper recycling that have to be followed in order to achieve desired results. Yet, many people recycle incorrectly creating problems, such as contamination. Recycling contamination is a term referred to items placed in bins that cannot be recycled or materials disposed of in the wrong recycling carts (Vantol, 2011). Recycling contamination is a significant problem and is most common in multi-family dwellings (MFDs). To compare to single-family dwellings (SFDs), MFDs have lower participation rates and higher contamination rates (Vantol, 2011). The problem exists around the world. Many different levels of governments and corporations have tried to tackle the problem of contamination. In some cases proposed solutions were successful, however in some they were not. A municipal agency - The North Shore Recycling Program offers recycling services to North Vancouver. Their mission is “to make conservation second nature on the North Shore by moving the community from environmental awareness to sustainable action” (North Shore Recycling website). The agency comes across the problem of recycling contamination extremely often. Thus, they would like to be informed of the reasons behind increased recycling contamination rates in MFDs and solutions that were successfully used in other areas, as well as some that were not, in order to overcome the barriers the agency experiences.

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)0.001
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 score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesFrench-language works237,207