MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285668449 · doi:10.52664/rima.v2.n1.2020.e69

Análise do disclosure dos gastos ambientais em empresas brasileiras de alto impacto Ambiental

2020· article· pt· W4285668449 on OpenAlexaff
Jediael De Sousa Rodrigues, Janaína Ferreira Marques de Melo

Bibliographic record

VenueREVISTA INTERDISCIPLINAR E DO MEIO AMBIENTE (RIMA) · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultural scienceWelfare economicsBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta pesquisa tem como finalidade analisar o disclosure dos gastos com o meio ambiente das empresas de alto impacto ambiental, cadastradas no Índice de Sustentabilidade Empresarial (ISE), mensurando seu nível de divulgação por meio da análise de conteúdo e identificando a relação das receitas líquidas com os gastos, por meio do Índice de Gastos Ambientais (IGA). Os instrumentos de coleta de dados foram as Notas Explicativas e os Relatórios de Sustentabilidade referentes aos exercícios de 2014 a 2016. De acordo com os resultados obtidos, com base na análise de conteúdo, os resultados evidenciaram que, nos três anos, as empresas apresentaram 4.616 categorias ambientais, contudo, nem sempre a evidenciação era totalmente clara com detalhes sobre o que foi investido, gasto ou registro de uma obrigação. Das dezessete empresas do grupo todas investiram um valor da receita liquida, porém, três realizaram em média gastos ambientais que superam 1% da receita líquida nos períodos de 2014 a 2016. Conclui-se, que as principais informações a respeito dos gastos ambientais estão divulgadas de forma não padronizada em seus relatórios.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueREVISTA INTERDISCIPLINAR E DO MEIO AMBIENTE (RIMA)Same topicBusiness and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207