MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092221666 · doi:10.12681/hapscpbs.24956

COVID-19 and Leisure: Directions for Policy Makers

2020· article· en· W3092221666 on OpenAlexaff
Ioanna Maria Kantartzi, George Karlis

Bibliographic record

VenueHAPSc Policy Briefs Series · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHappinessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Promotion (chess)PoliticsControl (management)State (computer science)PandemicPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologySocial psychologyEnvironmental ethicsLawMedicineEconomicsPhilosophyManagementComputer scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epictetus, the Greek Stoic Philosopher, once said “Happiness and freedom begin with a clear understanding of one’s principle. Some things are within your control; and some things are not”. In adopting Epictetus quote for the current COVID-19 world, it has become more important than ever to realize that freedom and happiness can be intrinsic states that come from within the individual. Leisure, also an intrinsic state, is linked with freedom and happiness, and when leisure, freedom and happiness are experienced, a healthy lifestyle can be under your control and achieved. The current paper presents the importance of experiencing leisure, freedom and happiness for physical and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic era. COVID-19 is not only political, social and economic challenge, but also a citizen’s well-being challenge. For this reason, three directions for policy making from the current and post COVID-19 era are presented: 1) the promotion of a healthy lifestyle, 2) individual and community activation and 3) empowering people.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAPSc Policy Briefs SeriesSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207