MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389083331 · doi:10.3384/ecp203029

Peeling Back the Layers: Prototyping Systemic Transformation through the Circular Food Innovation Lab

2023· article· en· W4389083331 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lily Raphael, Marcia Higuchi, Laura Kozak, Erin Nichols

Bibliographic record

VenueLinköping electronic conference proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsEmily Carr University of Art and Design
FundersMitacsLinköpings Universitet
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Work (physics)Food systemsFood insecurityAmbiguityBusinessMarketingService (business)Food wasteFood securityEngineeringComputer scienceGeographyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wasted food — the result of a linear pattern of producing, under-consuming and disposing of food — is a pervasive issue globally and in Canada. Wasted food is a complex challenge, meaning it is characterized by unpredictability, ambiguity, and many actors. The current climate crisis, food insecurity, economic disparity and housing inequality all intersect with this challenge. If we are to tackle these increasingly complex issues in social and public sectors, we need to work together in new and emergent ways. The Circular Food Innovation Lab was a unique research initiative that drew together municipal government, interdisciplinary designers and regional food businesses – grocers, food producers, distributors, restaurants and vendors – to tackle these complex challenges through systemic and service design methodologies, asking “how might we work together to increase circularity in Vancouver’s food system so that food is not lost or wasted; access to food is nourishing, equitable, and culturally appropriate; and habitats are protected for current and future generations of humans and more-than-humans?”

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinköping electronic conference proceedingsSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207