MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249626114 · doi:10.31542/j.ecj.143

Preface

2013· article· en· W4249626114 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Eloisa Perez

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Common Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonorNothingPrivilege (computing)WorshipThouLoanSociologyMillerEnvironmental ethicsObject (grammar)LawGloomPolitical scienceTheologyPhilosophyEconomicsPsychologyEpistemologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dr. J. W. Grant MacEwan, educator, environmentalist, politician and MacEwan University’s namesake once said… …about the planet “Thou shalt love and cherish the Great World of Nature, God’s House on loan to us for a season. Conscientious tenants should aspire to nothing less the lofty, practical and moral roles of caretakership. Good citizens should be grateful for the privilege and honor of answering to the challenge of those roles commonly known as conservation and environmental protection.” …about the people “Thou shalt despise the sins of extravagance and waste in the lives of both individuals and nations. In a world with limited resources and soaring populations, both breed hunger and misery.” …and, about profits… “Consider well thy regard for money. In the lives of young people, exercises in making and saving money may be good but when wealth becomes a object of worship for wealth’s sake or is accumulated in greedy and dishonest ways, there is not much to be said for it and there are many better shapes for a lifetime purpose. ” Although these assertions were made more than 40 years ago, they could not be more contemporary.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3730.250

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Common JournalSame topicEnvironmental Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207