MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Energy Poverty in Turkey

2019· article· en· W2980972560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
İşıl Şirin Selçuk, Ali Gökhan GÖLÇEK, Altuğ Murat Köktaş

Bibliographic record

VenueSosyoekonomi · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy povertyPovertyEnergy consumptionQuarter (Canadian coin)Socioeconomic statusConsumption (sociology)Energy (signal processing)Scope (computer science)Sustainable developmentEconomicsSurvey data collectionSustainable energyEconomic growthDevelopment economicsBusinessSocioeconomicsGeographyRenewable energyPolitical scienceDemographyStatisticsPopulationEngineeringSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access to energy is a prerequisite for human development. For this reason, the concept of energy poverty is carefully monitored by the United Nations and the European Union within the scope of “Sustainable Development” objectives. In this study, energy poverty is conceptually investigated, and the data related to the current energy consumption and the main indicators of energy poverty in various countries were examined. Moreover, socioeconomic characteristics of energy poor households in Turkey were examined with the help of the 2017 Household Budget Survey data set. According to the most recent data available, about one-quarter of households in Turkey are energy poor while nearly half of the households, which have the lowest income levels, were found to carry the risk of facing energy poverty. For the richest households, this rate is only 3.48%. Additionally, the share of energy poor households was observed to decrease from 2003 to 2017.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.162 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSosyoekonomiSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207