MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362597443 · doi:10.37256/aie.4120232503

Towards Artificial Intelligence in Sustainable Environmental Development

2023· article· en· W4362597443 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity Canada West
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityEnvironmentally friendlyGlobeSustainable developmentPopularityResilience (materials science)Extreme weatherEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeEnvironmental planningBiodiversityAgricultureEnvironmental impact assessmentBusinessNatural resource economicsEngineeringEnvironmental scienceEcologyPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most significant problems facing humankind now is environmental issues, which have harmed life on the planet. Research has been done continuously to lessen the effects of climate change on the local level and to manage its causes. Due to its indisputable rise in popularity, Artificial Intelligence (AI) will be used in a wide range of businesses and for several causes, such as environmental sustainability. Centers with significant ecological impacts may use AI's potential to alter the globe as the field expands. This article focuses on industries using AI applications for sustainable environmental development such as biodiversity, energy, water, transportation, air, agriculture, and resilience to extreme events. Next, some limitations are presented. To benefit both current and future generations, environmentally friendly AI should be developed.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.013

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.215 · 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