MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231645709 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14657031

Canadian smart cities: a case for the circular economy in the age of "smart" innovation

2021· preprint· en· W4231645709 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vickey Simovic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCircular economyReuseSmart cityRemanufacturingDigital economyRepurposingBusinessSuiteKey (lock)SustainabilityEngineeringComputer sciencePolitical scienceInternet of ThingsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Smart Cities Challenge enabled municipalities across the country to reflect on how smart city technology can be used to solve their unique community challenges, embrace the possibility of impactful projects, create collaborations, and create a suite of digital tools. This paper analyses whether governments can be catalysts in adopting circular economy thinking in the age of digital innovation. In reviewing the SCC applications, five proposal submissions were analysed in depth against a circular economy framework. Recommendations for further development in smart city thinking centre around future Smart Cities Challenges, and building circular assumptions into the challenge questions, whereby ensuring circular principles are a priority for municipalities as they continue to grow and adapt to smart city technological advances. Key words: Smart Cities Challenge, circular economy, smart city technology, innovation, sustainable,​ ​reuse, sharing, remanufacturing and repurposing

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207