MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3044606135 · doi:10.1002/pan3.10124

Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability

2020· article· en· W3044606135 on OpenAlexafffund
Kai M. A. Chan, David R. Boyd, Rachelle K. Gould, Jens Jetzkowitz, Jianguo Liu, Barbara Muraca, Robin Naidoo, Paige Olmsted, Terre Satterfield, Odirilwe Selomane, Gerald G. Singh, Rashid Sumaila, Hien T. Ngo, Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono, John Agard, Ana Paula Aguiar, Dolors Armenteras, Lenke Balint, Christopher Barrington‐Leigh, William W. L. Cheung, Sandra Dı́az, John Driscoll, Karen J. Esler, Harold N. Eyster, Edward J. Gregr, Shizuka Hashimoto, Gladys Cecilia Hernández Pedraza, Thomas Hickler, Marcel Kok, Tanya Lazarova, Assem A. A. Mohamed, Mike Murray‐Hudson, Patrick O’Farrell, Ignacio Palomo, Ali Kerem Saysel, Ralf Seppelt, Josef Settele, Bernardo B. N. Strassburg, Dayuan Xue, Eduardo S. Brondízio

Bibliographic record

VenuePeople and Nature · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreFisheries and Oceans CanadaMcGill UniversityWestern Forest ProductsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaAgBioResearch, Michigan State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSustainabilityDeliberationBusinessIncentiveLeverage (statistics)Environmental economicsEconomicsEnvironmental resource managementPublic economicsPolitical scienceComputer scienceMicroeconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.021
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0020.016
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations313
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeople and Nature→Same topicSustainability and Climate Change Governance→French-language works237,207→