MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116081802 · doi:10.14288/1.0392603

Reducing Single-Use Plastic Cup Waste at Events Held in the Engineering Student Centre (ESC)

2020· article· en· W3116081802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Selection and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastic wasteSingle useEngineeringForensic engineeringWaste managementProcess engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UBC SEEDS Program introduced students to the client, the Engineering Undergraduate Society (“EUS”), on January 3, 2019. From the list of sustainability concerns highlighted, it was determined the team would be addressing the principle client concern of single use plastic cup waste. [Client Concern] Events hosted at the EUS student building are resulting in the disposal of a significant volume of single-use plastic cups. The EUS is seeking policy solutions to reduce the number of single-use plastic cups disposed across all event-types. [Actions taken] The student team undertook preliminary research to assess the status of the singleuse plastics disposal problem. This included: conducting stakeholder interviews, reviewing current EUS contracts and related policy regulation, and attending two EUS events of varying size and duration to observe event participant behavior and construct a sample baseline of cup use. [Deliverable Content] As a part of the final report, the student team has produced recommendations for immediate action by EUS as well as a detailed pilot project design for use by the EUS Sustainability Council to evaluate longer-term, more intensive solutions. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.150 · 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