MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ENVIRONMENT-BASED DESIGN (EBD) APPROACH TO IDENTIFY CRITICAL ISSUES IN MANAGING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: NAIROBI, KENYAN CASE STUDY

2021· article· en· W3198560570 on OpenAlexaff
Wenhang Du, Jiami Yang, Hua Ge, Jun‐Juh Yan, Nadia Bhuiyan, Xizhao LIU, Fengjiao Zhou, Yong Zeng

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)KenyaEnvironmental planningBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringComputer scienceGeographyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. As the urban population grows and the global economy develops, municipal solid waste management (MSWM) has become an increasingly prominent global issue. MSWM is particularly difficult in developing countries due to its high cost and time-consuming nature. The Environment-based design (EBD) can potentially contribute to global MSWM by reducing costs and increasing efficiency, especially in helping developing countries identify critical issues in MSWM. This paper uses and demonstrates the effectiveness and efficiency of the EBD method to analyze and identify critical issues in MSWM, using the city of Nairobi as a case study. This paper contains the first two of EBD's three activities: environment analysis and conflict identification, during the design problem period, design knowledge, and design solutions simultaneously and interdependently evolve as a part of the environment. The comparison with the existing literature confirms that the conclusions reached are, to some extent, reliable, time-saving, and less costly, which will offer a possibility to solve the problem of MSWM in impoverished areas.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207