Unveiling global sustainability boundaries: exploring inner dimensions of human critical determinants for sustainability
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Greater global awareness and action to implement sustainable development are underway. However, global progress towards sustainability has been slow. Advancing towards some form of sustainability requires greater attention and analysis of the role played by the human inner world. While the scientific analytic tools have focused on external aspects, we present a scientific methodology to identify human critical determinants (HCDs) acquired during the human biological and cultural evolution, which, although crucial for survival, well-being, and economic prosperity, may also currently act as human sustainability boundaries (HSDs). These boundaries can be softened by personal transformations with the capability of spurring resonant institutional and governance transformations. This commentary examines how a definable set of interacting and interdependent HCD provides a complete and coherent explanation of why reaching sustainability is currently an elusive objective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.233 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it