MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745495189

CONSTRUÇÃO DE QUESTIONÁRIO COM BASE NA ESCALA DE LIKERT PARA AVALIAÇÃO DOS IMPACTOS DE PARQUES EÓLICOS EM COMUNIDADES TRADICIONAIS

2017· article· pt· W2745495189 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicolly Santos Leite, Wallason Farias de Souza, Edson Vicente da Silva, Christian Brannstrom, Adryane Gorayeb, Adryane Gorayeb Nogueira Caetano

Bibliographic record

VenueEncontros Universitários da UFC · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Os impactos socioambientais da implantacao de parques eolicos no litoral cearense e objeto de estudo de pesquisadores como Meireles et al. (2013), Oliveira (2014), Gorayeb e Brannstrom (2016) por meio de uma perspectiva qualitativa, cabendo as tambem comunidades participarem deste contexto cientifico como porta-vozes das alteracoes na dinâmica do meio fisico-ambiental local que comprometem o modo de vida. Nesse sentido, tais sujeitos sao fundamentais na reflexao das influencias de parques eolicos. Partindo deste pensamento buscou-se elaborar um questionario com base na escala de Likert, a fim de mensurar a percepcao das comunidades atingidas pela energia eolica no litoral cearense. Adotou-se como fundamentacao teorica o trabalho de Walker, Baxter e Ouellette (2014, 2015) sobre usinas eolicas em comunidades do Canada. Assim, o questionario foi construido com afirmacoes propostas por Walker, Baxter e Ouellette (2014), contudo foi adaptado a realidade local por meio da realizacao de reunioes previas nas comunidades de Tatajuba e Amarelas (ambas em Camocim) e Assentamento maceio (Itapipoca). O questionario e composto por itens que apresentam uma possibilidade de pontuacao em cinco niveis, que variam em modo decrescente de aceitacao. As afirmacoes sao distribuidas de acordo com os seguintes assuntos: (i) dados gerais dos entrevistados e localizacao da residencia; (ii) opiniao sobre os parques eolicos (apoio ao projeto de energia eolica); (iii) processo politico de implantacao dos parques eolicos (confianca em agentes publicos para a resolucao de problemas e fornecimento de informacoes); (iv) distribuicao dos beneficios e problemas (problemas ambientais, conflitos, etc.). Por meio da posterior aplicacao e pontuacao inferida pelo entrevistado para cada afirmativa tornar-se-a possivel comparar itens, individuos e grupos e mensurar o nivel de concordância quanto ao processo de implantacao e suas consequencias.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.117
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.117
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncontros Universitários da UFCSame topicEnvironmental Sustainability and EducationFrench-language works237,207