MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399497082 · doi:10.1002/cprt.31988

Saint‐Gobain launches new product donation initiative.

2024· article· en· W4399497082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Philanthropy Report · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiotechnology and Related Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonationSAINTProduct (mathematics)Waste managementBusinessPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer scienceComputer securityLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction materials manufacturer Saint-Gobain North America has launched a partnership with Good360, a leading coordinator of in-kind and product donations, to support the organization's disaster preparation and relief efforts throughout the United States and Canada. The partnership will enable greater investment of resources distributed in local communities recovering from the effects of natural disasters and embedding corporate social responsibility in the company's actions and decisions, Saint-Gobain said. The partnership includes a $60,000 grant from the Saint-Gobain North America Foundation, in-kind donations of light and sustainable building materials for rebuilding efforts, and volunteer hours to support preparation of supplies used for disaster relief efforts managed by Good360, the company said, noting that Good360's comprehensive approach to providing support in all phases of a disaster—from preparation to immediate response, to long-term recovery—aligns with the Saint-Gobain North America Foundation's aim to provide relief for individuals and communities impacted by disaster as they begin the long path to recovery. According to Good360, the funding from Saint-Gobain will strengthen Good360's ability to source and distribute building supply donations to get survivors back in their homes faster in the wake of a disaster event.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorporate Philanthropy ReportSame topicBiotechnology and Related FieldsFrench-language works237,207