MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996731321 · doi:10.1007/s11367-019-01706-7

On the reporting and review requirements of ISO 14044

2019· article· en· W2996731321 on OpenAlexaff
Christoph Koffler, Ben Amor, Michael Carbajales‐Dale, Joseph Cascio, Alison Conroy, James A. Fava, Caroline Gaudreault, Thomas P. Gloria, Connie Hensler, Arpad Horvath, Sébastien Humbert, Alessandro Manzardo, Manuele Margni, Philippe Osset, Julie Sinistore, Bruce Vigon, Michele Wallace, Michael Wang, Martina Prox

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Business

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s LCA world, one can encounter a variety of LCA practitioners and commissioners from different industries and fields of research who have different levels of expertise, experience, and expectations. Even those with more experience who are actively involved in the field of LCA can have rather varying opinions about what ISO 14044 requires (or does not require) regarding the preparation, critical review, and dissemination of third-party reports in accordance with ISO 14044:2006, clauses 5 and 6 (ISO 2006a ).

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)0.200
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.319
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2000.319
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0220.016
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0220.010
Open science0.0120.005
Research integrity0.0280.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.077

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Life Cycle AssessmentSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207