MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393307634 · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2024.03.001

Grand challenges in anticipating and responding to critical materials supply risks

2024· article· en· W4393307634 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

VenueJoule · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEIT RawMaterials
KeywordsFrontierGrand ChallengesLead (geology)Risk analysis (engineering)BusinessEmerging marketsGovernment (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Environmental planningPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical materials are resources that are vulnerable to supply disruptions, where those disruptions can have significant adverse impacts on society. In the coming years, materials supply risks associated with the energy transition and geopolitics are likely to intensify and new risks are expected to emerge. This perspective identifies three "Grand Challenges" that represent frontier areas for critical materials research and highlights some promising new directions for each area: (1) extending visibility downstream to value-added materials beyond elemental forms; (2) quantifying the risks associated with market dynamics; and (3) developing tools to inform policy interventions. Emerging digital capabilities have the potential to play a significant role addressing long-standing limitations in data quality and access to unlock progress on these challenges. Progress in these areas can equip decision-makers across industry, government, and finance with tools to understand the complexity and uncertainty introduced by these real-world challenges.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.287 · 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