MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394014200 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-58250-0

Cerebrating and engagement, paths to reduce fresh produce waste within homes

2024· article· en· W4394014200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cathrine Jansson-Boyd, Cari‐lène Mul, Daniela Raeva

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood wasteQuarter (Canadian coin)Food preparationSample (material)Environmental healthWaste managementPsychologyBusinessEnvironmental scienceMedicineFood scienceFood safetyEngineeringGeographyBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A real-world study was conducted with the aim to reduce people's fresh fruit and vegetables waste within their homes. For 6 weeks participants measured their fresh produce waste. Half the participants were impelled to complete food waste logs whilst the other half was a control group. This was followed by a 6-month monitoring period to establish if changes would last. Fresh produce waste decreased with over a quarter of what the participants had wasted at the beginning of the 6 weeks, for all groups. Additionally, an attitude questionnaire distributed at the onset and at the end of the study showed a shift in pro-reduction of food waste. As this indicated that thinking about food waste prompts engagement, we tested this idea using a different sample group. A questionnaire measuring attitudes and cognition confirmed the importance of thinking and provided further insight into the findings from the first study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicFood Waste Reduction and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207