MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947646117 · doi:10.1080/14606925.2019.1595002

Climate Anticipation: working towards a design proposal for urban resilience and care

2019· article· en· W2947646117 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer M Z Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Design Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Resilience (materials science)Urban resilienceClimate changePsychological resiliencePsychologyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceGeographySocial psychologyEngineeringEconomicsUrban planningCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 'winter of…' and the 'hottest day since…' are narratives that describe our experience with a climate that informed our behaviours of the time.What was, isn't necessarily what will be, and as global climate change shifts and pushes us into unfamiliar climatic experiences, we seek a more meaningful way to anticipate climate change.In this instance climate is viewed as a disruptive element in society with its shift, apparent unpredictability, and impact affecting those less equipped to anticipate.With extreme changes in temperature, high air pollution levels, and lack of rain water, climate change is felt and seen.CAPE (Climate Anticipation Personal Environment) is a conceptual framework to inform society of impending environmental extremes by communicating immediate futures.Four case studies explore current technologies being applied in our surrounding terrestrial and extraterrestrial environments.Together they represent our anticipated materialisation of CAPE.This paper seeks to enable vulnerable communities to be better prepared through warning systems, to better seek relief through interventions, and to develop anticipation and care in large cities, those lacking green spaces and natural approaches in order to align climate anticipation with the needs of society.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Design JournalSame topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207