MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799555431 · doi:10.1029/2017rg000591

The Global Food‐Energy‐Water Nexus

2018· article· en· W2799555431 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo D’Odorico, Kyle Frankel Davis, Lorenzo Rosa, Joel A. Carr, Davide Danilo Chiarelli, Jampel Dell’Angelo, Jessica A. Gephart, Graham K. MacDonald, David A. Seekell, Samir Suweis, Maria Cristina Rulli

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews of Geophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNature ConservancyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNexus (standard)Food securityFood systemsFood energyNatural resource economicsWater securityRenewable energyEnergy securityPopulationAgricultureBusinessWater resourcesEconomicsEcologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Water availability is a major factor constraining humanity's ability to meet the future food and energy needs of a growing and increasingly affluent human population. Water plays an important role in the production of energy, including renewable energy sources and the extraction of unconventional fossil fuels that are expected to become important players in future energy security. The emergent competition for water between the food and energy systems is increasingly recognized in the concept of the “food‐energy‐water nexus.” The nexus between food and water is made even more complex by the globalization of agriculture and rapid growth in food trade, which results in a massive virtual transfer of water among regions and plays an important role in the food and water security of some regions. This review explores multiple components of the food‐energy‐water nexus and highlights possible approaches that could be used to meet food and energy security with the limited renewable water resources of the planet. Despite clear tensions inherent in meeting the growing and changing demand for food and energy in the 21st century, the inherent linkages among food, water, and energy systems can offer an opportunity for synergistic strategies aimed at resilient food, water, and energy security, such as the circular economy.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations770
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews of GeophysicsSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207