MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215720745 · doi:10.1002/9783527816392.ch1

Introduction, Vision, and Opportunities

2021· other· en· W3215720745 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Holuszko, Denise Crocce Romano Espinosa, Tatiana Scarazzato, Amit Kumar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardous wasteElectronic equipmentElectronic wasteLegislatureEngineeringIncentiveBusinessWaste managementElectronicsConsumption (sociology)Municipal solid wastePolitical scienceEconomicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrical and electronic manufacturing industry is one of the fastest-growing industries. Electronic devices could contain up to sixty (60) different elements that could be valuable or hazardous. The high consumption of electronic devices also creates the issue of end-of-life disposal after being discarded. These discarded electronics, also referred to as e-waste, have been a growing concern around the world. The total e-waste generated worldwide in 2019 was 53.6 million tonnes and is growing at a rate of 3–4% per year. If dealt with properly, e-waste recycling could provide economic incentive as the total contained/potential value of selected metal and materials present in e-waste was US$57 billion in 2019. E-waste recycling is an inter/multidisciplinary theme where technical, economic, legislative, social, and environmental aspects are involved throughout the life cycle of all-electric and electronic equipment, including recycling after their disposal. This book seeks to provide an overview of all aspects of a sustainable future.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.038

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207