MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3157248347 · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2021.03.005

A framework for complex climate change risk assessment

2021· article· en· W3157248347 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicholas P. Simpson, Katharine J. Mach, Andrew Constable, Ryan Hogarth, Mark Howden, Judy Lawrence, Robert J. Lempert, Veruska Muccione, Brendan Mackey, Mark New, Brian C. O’Neill, Friederike E. L. Otto, Hans‐Otto Pörtner, Andy Reisinger, Debra Roberts, Daniela N. Schmidt, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Steven Strongin, Maarten van Aalst, Edmond Totin, Christopher H. Trisos

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Earth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeGovernment of the United KingdomMinistry for the Environment, New ZealandAfrican Academy of SciencesRoyal SocietyInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsClimate changeCLARITYPerspective (graphical)Risk analysis (engineering)Risk assessmentClimate riskEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessComputer scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceComputer securityEcology

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations668
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne Earth→Same topicSustainability and Climate Change Governance→French-language works237,207→