MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611139970 · doi:10.2495/dne-v12-n3-338-347

Social sustainable development or sustainable social development - Two sides of the same coin? The structure of social justice as a normative basis for the social dimension of sustainability

2017· article· en· W2611139970 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thilo J. Ketschau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeSocial sustainabilitySustainabilitySustainable developmentSociologyDimension (graph theory)Social justiceEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of the social dimension of sustainability is discussed in the terminological dualism, which is essential to the concept itself: Sustainable social development (SuSoDe), addressing the idea of a socially sustainable society, and social sustainable development (SoSuDe), regarding the implementation of sustainability in the structure of society.Thereby, the precarious interdependency of both concepts becomes obvious, revealing the necessity of a multidimensional model of social justice as a normative foundation.This model is described in its functional idea as a merging point for the dualism of the development of the social dimension of sustainability and therefore as a framework for social sustainability theory.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.058
Scholarly communication0.0090.016
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207