MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024219198 · doi:10.33137/jaste.v5i1.34270

“No Car Day”

2020· article· en· W3024219198 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard C. Chu, Vijey Jeevakumaran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for Activist Science and Technology Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThursdayMorningCarpoolEvent (particle physics)Names of the days of the weekTime of dayClimate changeAction (physics)DuskAdvertisingPsychologyTransport engineeringEngineeringBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transportation is the major factor contributing to climate change. We decided to address the issue of transportation in relation to climate change for this research-informed action (RiA) project. The purpose of our RiA project was to learn about transportation and climate change, conduct a mini-correlational study, and address the issue by encouraging students and their parents to limit car use. After learning that a larger portion of the boys and girls that we surveyed rely on cars to get to school we decided to organize an event called “No Car Day” at Erindale SS on March 22, 2013. This coincided with Earth Hour. In addition, we made announcements from Monday to Thursday to inform student s about this specific event. We counted the number of cars prior to the event and found that an average of 156 cars dropped students off in the morning. On the morning of the event, we counted the number of cars again. This time, the number of cars was 115.We think that our campaign made a difference. We want to encourage students in other schools to organize similar events. We encourage our peers and our teachers to carpool, take the bus, bike or walk. If we all do our part, then we may be able to alleviate the negative effects that transportation has on climate change before it is too late.

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)0.001
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 score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for Activist Science and Technology EducationSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207