MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306853408 · doi:10.3895/rts.v18n53.15795

Planares: análise e sugestões de aperfeiçoamentos

2022· article· pt· W4306853408 on OpenAlexaff
Camilo Terranova, Francisco Luiz Biazini Filho

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Tecnologia e Sociedade · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Development and Societal Issues
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visando reduzir as enormes ineficiências dos padrões de produção e consumo expressos por meio dos resíduos gerados pela sociedade e os consequentes custos socioambientais e econômicos, uma gama crescente de políticas vem sendo criada e implementada em todo o mundo. Este trabalho traz evidências de que a política recém-lançada no Brasil (Planares) deu o tom nacionalmente, com conceitos parcialmente desatualizados e indicadores duvidosos e, portanto, já está madura para uma nova revisão. Tais revisões podem, contudo, ser feitas em nível municipal, como demonstrado no caso de São José dos Campos e sem custo adicional.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Tecnologia e SociedadeSame topicUrban Development and Societal IssuesFrench-language works237,207