MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How can alternative food systems contribute to the sustainable development goals?

2019· article· fr· W3002142159 on OpenAlexaffabout
Renata Pozelli Sabio, Pascale Lehoux

Bibliographic record

VenueINRIA a CCSD electronic archive server · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentEnvironmental planningBusinessNatural resource economicsRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceEconomicsBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet essai a pour objectif de clarifier pourquoi les systèmes alimentaires alternatifs soutenus par une approche différente en Science, Technologie et Innovation (STI) peuvent contribuer aux Objectifs de Développement Durable (ODD). Ces systèmes sont analysés à la lumière du cadre des ODD et leurs contributions illustrées à travers trois exemples du Québec, qui montrent comment les STI pourraient consolider les systèmes alimentaires alternatifs afin de générer les changements requis par les ODD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINRIA a CCSD electronic archive serverSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207