MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172224769 · doi:10.3370/lca.10.230

The Overview of Scenario Planning

2014· article· en· W3172224769 on OpenAlexaff
Nishimura Michinari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Life Cycle Assessment Japan · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractScenario planningConstructiveFutures studiesManagement scienceStrategic planningTheme (computing)NarrativeProcess managementComputer scienceBusinessProcess (computing)EngineeringMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scenario planning is the useful strategic planning tool in the uncertain age. Developed by Royal Dutch Shell in 1970s, it deals with multiple plausible futures, fostering objective thinking among strategy planners. It also triggers constructive dialogue among multiple stakeholders by having them suspend their beliefs. By focusing on the future uncertainties and multiple aspects to form the future states, scenarios delineate the futures vividly in the form of narratives. Due to those details, people involved in scenario planning can discuss right strategic direction easily. It is a powerful planning tool, especially for public theme such as environmental issues since it fosters immediate actions to create a better future by identifying critical issues to overcome and pitfalls to avoid well in advance.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.010

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Life Cycle Assessment JapanSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207