MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017258638 · doi:10.1787/a339de43-en

Space sustainability

2020· paratext· en· W3017258638 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOECD science, technology and industry policy papers · 2020
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCouncil for Science and Technology PolicyNærings- og FiskeridepartementetKorea Aerospace Research InstituteNorsk RomsenterCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesAgenzia Spaziale ItalianaNetherlands Space OfficeNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationEuropean Space AgencyCanadian Space AgencyUK Space Agency
KeywordsSustainabilitySpace (punctuation)Situational ethicsSpace policyFocus (optics)BusinessSpace debrisPrivate sectorPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementProcess managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceEngineeringEconomicsGeographyPhysicsAerospace engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores selected long-term sustainability issues related to increasing activities in outer space, with a particular focus on the economics of space debris. It reviews trends of selected space sustainability issues and discusses a range of possible policy actions. A notable policy response would be to strengthen space situational awareness systems and data reporting structures, while addressing operator compliance behaviour at both the national and international levels. Adequately addressing these challenges will require a reinforced coordinated international approach, in addition to increased collaboration with the private sector.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2090.089

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOECD science, technology and industry policy papersSame topicSpace exploration and regulationFrench-language works237,207