MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392053593 · doi:10.1080/1088937x.2024.2311785

Advancing a WEF nexus security index for Alaska: an informed starting point for policy making

2024· article· en· W4392053593 on OpenAlexafffund
Chloe Smith Lopez, Ana-Maria Bogdan, Ken Belcher, David Natcher

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Geography · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCrown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs CanadaIndigenous and Northern Affairs Canada
KeywordsNexus (standard)Index (typography)Political sciencePoint (geometry)Environmental resource managementPublic administrationEconomicsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water, energy, and food (WEF) security has become a key area of research in sustainable development. Prompted by the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, a large body of research highlights the inter-connectedness of WEF systems and the dangers of their siloed treatment. Simultaneously, more attention is being placed on the WEF security of remote populations in the Arctic, especially for areas like Alaska, where WEF insecurities are prevalent, yet obscured by national reporting. This research developed a WEF Nexus Security Index for the state of Alaska that can be used by policy-makers to consider plausible causes for regional inequalities and why some regions of Alaska, and not others are exposed to higher levels of WEF insecurity. Beyond the conceptual value of the index, an on-line Arctic WEF Nexus Security portal was developed that further enables policy-makers and community leaders to track changes in WEF security and monitor the effects stemming from future interventions, be they policy or technological in nature. By bridging nexus thinking and nexus doing, we hope to provide policy-makers with a novel and accessible tool for achieving WEF security in Alaska.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.012
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar GeographySame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207