MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914501174 · doi:10.33002/nr2581.6853.01022

Philosophical Foundations of Ecological Ethics

2018· article· en· W2914501174 on OpenAlex
Hryhorii Vasianovych, Olena Budnyk, Hasrat Arjjumend

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGrassroots Journal of Natural Resources · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnocracyEnvironmental ethicsConsciousnessNatural (archaeology)Context (archaeology)EcologyEcological crisisSociologyEpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLawGeographyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article substantiates the essence of ecological ethics in the context of modern scientific research. The emphasis lies on the need to develop a strategy and approach of human behavior amid the natural environment, rational nature management, protection and restoration of the surrounding world. The new methodological thinking is characterized by philosophical foundation of ecological ethics (ecological consciousness, ecological thinking, ecological values, ecological activity, etc.). The idea of development of environmental ethics based on principles of Christian and Philosophic noology is introduced. The world outlook is changing rapidly with its positive and negative aspects. It requires humanization of natural environment as well as a human being by forming ecological consciousness. There is a necessity of humanization of technosphere and abandoning technocratic thinking, which is anti-culture itself and, at times, it endangers human race on the Earth.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.265 · 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