MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586734545 · doi:10.17975/sfj-2016-007

Environmental Analysis of Toronto Neighbourhoods

2016· article· en· W2586734545 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lunjun Zhang, Jenny Baek, Evgeny Bogopolskiy, Justin Palombo

Bibliographic record

VenueSTEM Fellowship Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutantChristian ministryEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningPollutionAir pollutionEnvironmental pollutionEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental engineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increase in the industrial pollution produced by Toronto, Ontario is negatively impacting the city’s environmental conditions. Although the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change has attempted to improve environment, efforts require continual re-focusing to remain effective. After research and discussion, four main factors that can affect the environment were identified: tree cover, pollutants released to air, pollutant carcinogenic Toxic Equivalency Potentials (TEP) score, and pollutant non-carcinogenic TEP score. A program which outputs a list of neighbourhoods in dire environmental condition was designed based on those four main factors and general analysis. This program uses an input of several datasets from the Open Data Toronto database. Possible solutions to pollution and areas of environmental improvement are ultimately suggested, with the objective being to raise environmental awareness.

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)0.000
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTEM Fellowship JournalSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207