MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970031717 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2019.104328

Analytical framework and data for evaluating a City Resilience Strategy’s emphasis on social equity and justice

2019· article· en· W2970031717 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanne Fitzgibbons, Carrie L. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEquity (law)Social justiceEmphasis (telecommunications)SociologyResilience (materials science)Economic JusticeData sciencePsychologyEngineering ethicsComputer sciencePolitical scienceCriminologyLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article contains four data tables: 1 and 2: A content analysis framework for evaluating the degree to which urban resilience plans emphasize issues of justice and equity in plan content, and associated point rubric for scoring criteria; 3. The raw numerical data collected for a plan evaluation where we deployed this framework to analyze a sample of 31 strategies from the "100 Resilient Cities - Pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation" (100RC) initiative; and, 4. Inter-rater reliability scores for this plan evaluation. This dataset accompanies a 2019 article submitted to the journal World Development titled:

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.307
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207