MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2967280828

Overcoming Systemic Barriers to

2014· article· en· W2967280828 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Calvert

Bibliographic record

VenueAlternate routes · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystemic riskBusinessComputer scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a broad consensus among climate scientists and policy makers that reducing the GHG emissions and energy consumption of the built environment is critical to mitigating the impact of global warming. This means adopting policiesthat will dramatically accelerate the introduction of low carbon construction, both in new structures and in retrofitting the existing building stock. An important, but often overlooked, component of this process is how to ensure that climate objectives are properly implemented at the workplace by building trades workers. This paper argues that for this to happen, there must be major changes in how the industryis organized – changes that challenge the unregulated market with its pervasive reliance on labour sub-contracting and precarious employment and its negative impact on building standards. The industry must transform its inadequate training and apprenticeship system to give workers the additional skills needed for low carbon construction. It must reduce the loss of qualified workers and their skills, by providing greater job security and a long term career in the industry. And it must incorporate a greater role for the workforce - and the unions that represent it - in creating a ‘green’ construction culture at the workplace.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.010
Scholarly communication0.0170.010
Open science0.0030.019
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.005

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.367 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAlternate routes→Same topicSchool Health and Nursing Education→French-language works237,207→