MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ozone Hole

2019· other· en· W4231404437 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Hannigan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolOzoneOzone layerStratosphereOzone depletionEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ozone hole is one of the most striking and influential metaphors in contemporary environmental discourse. Not an actual “hole” as such, it refers to a progressive, seasonal thinning of ozone concentrations in the lower stratosphere provoked by a buildup of chlorine‐based compounds emitted by refrigerators, air conditioners, and aerosol spray cans. This results in the destruction of ozone molecules that protect us from ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Harmful effects include an elevated risk of skin cancer, cataracts, and a weakening of the human immune system. The ozone hole was first dramatically depicted in an animated video created from longitudinal NASA satellite data, showing a precipitous decline in ozone concentrations over the Antarctic since 1960. The image of a “hole in the ozone” resonated widely with journalists, politicians, and the public. It played a central role in the passing of the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, widely described as the most successful multilateral environmental agreement ever. Ozone levels in the stratosphere stabilized at the beginning of the millennium, but have since started to rise again, partly because the replacements for chemical compounds banned by the Montreal Protocol have proven to be less benign than expected.

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)0.003
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.015

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Blackwell Encyclopedia of SociologySame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207