MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805127347 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v11n3p223

Waste Management Mind Map: Public Environmental Awareness Project and Creativity in Knowledge and Performance

2018· article· en· W2805127347 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fatema K. Al-Asfour, Heba A. Al-Helailah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMind mapCreativityCornerstoneEnvironmental educationSociologyKnowledge managementSustainabilityPublic relationsComputer sciencePsychologyBusinessEngineering ethicsEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEcologyEngineeringSocial psychologyPedagogyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A progressive society wants to raise awareness, especially what affects everyday life. This study focuses on simplification waste management by using Mind Map. The cornerstone of this research is the use of mind maps in the field of environmental awareness, increasing environmental awareness of waste negative impact, minimizing its use, and the healthy and environmentally safe alternative. The researcher seeks to link the concepts and goals the 17 goals of sustainable development of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), with awareness of waste management and modern theories of learning, in order to reach new methodology used in awareness activities. Applied the feasibility and impact of Mind Maps on understanding and simplifying the waste management course for students’ community at the Environmental Health department _ College of Health Science. Buzan’s iMindMap 4 software was used to create mind maps for simplifying the project of waste management, the software uses lines, colours, arrows, branches to show connections between the ideas generated. Results of meta-analysis of concept waste management mind maps in student community indicated that concept mapping has positive effects on understanding, assimilation and application, Post-test results showed that experimental community made higher gains in understanding, easy to add ideas, Help you focus on the links and relationships between ideas so you don't just have disconnected facts.Researchers will be based on results in the awareness activity to reach an optimal understanding of the negatives of waste and the responsibility of the community.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207