MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400134344 · doi:10.1002/sd.3108

Alignment of the 2030 Agenda to the port industry

2024· article· en· W4400134344 on OpenAlexafffundabout
David Tremblay, Claude Villeneuve, Patrick Faubert

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersMitacs
KeywordsCLARITYPort (circuit theory)Sustainable developmentSustainabilityIdentification (biology)Process managementBridge (graph theory)Relevance (law)BusinessSupply chainPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The United Nations' 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda) serves as a global framework for addressing sustainability challenges. The port industry (PI) plays a crucial role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a vital component of the global economy and supply chains. This research paper addresses the alignment between the PI and the 2030 Agenda. The study aims to bridge the research gap by exploring the extent to which the PI aligns with the SDGs and proposes a framework for implementation. Through an analysis of literature, this study identifies the relevant SDG targets for the PI. The original wordings of the relevant targets were adapted to make them meaningful to the PI. The adapted targets were validated by eight Canadian Port authorities to ensure their relevance and clarity. The alignment resulted in the identification of 69 targets, representing all 17 SDGs.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable DevelopmentSame topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207