Evaluating evolving experiments: the case of local government action to implement ecological sustainable design
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While accounts of urban climate change governance and planning are growing, there is a need for further conceptual and empirical work to better understand processes of change and uptake across a range of local responses. This paper uses the Council Alliance for a Sustainable Built Environment (CASBE) as an urban experiment seeking to influence development and planning decisions to improve sustainability outcomes in the built environment in the State of Victoria, Australia. The evaluation is structured using Luederitz et al.’s tentative evaluative scheme for sustainability transition experiments. This paper also seeks to test, reflect, and further develop the scheme by highlighting the challenge of evaluating unbounded and not necessarily purposefully designed experiments. Finally, this paper calls for developing an approach to better reveal the political, social, and institutional complexities influencing the potential of experiments.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it