MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175553331 · doi:10.1038/s42949-021-00033-x

Towards an integrated decision-support system for sustainable organic waste management (optim-O)

2021· article· en· W3175553331 on OpenAlexafffund
Céline Vaneeckhaute, Eric Walling, Sonia Rivest, Evangelina Belia, Ian Chartrand, Francis Fortin, Mir Abolfazl Mostafavi

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Urban Sustainability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDecision support systemProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)Variety (cybernetics)Quality (philosophy)Key (lock)Computer scienceInterface (matter)SoftwareSystems engineeringProcess managementRisk analysis (engineering)Operations researchEngineeringBusinessData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biomethanation projects across the world struggle with multiple challenges related to the location selection and optimization of the treatment facilities. Important aspects such as treatment plant location and treatment process chain configuration depend on the waste sources to be treated, the required end-product type and quality, as well as its final use destination, all of which are variable in time and space. This research describes the development and use of an integrated decision-support software tool that allows setting up optimal organic waste value chains, named optim-O. Key features of the tool include a multidimensional spatiotemporal database, a model-based decision module for simulation and optimization, as well as a user-friendly interface. The availability of such a software tool will not only allow to save time and money on data collection and calculations, but will also induce more comprehensive decisions by simultaneously taking into account a variety of factors, thereby significantly facilitating and enhancing the decision-making process.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Urban SustainabilitySame topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207