Decoding Sustainability Signals: Spectator Perspectives at the 2022 European Championships
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to explore event-related signals related to sustainability at the 2022 European Championships in Munich. Drawing upon spectator perspectives and participant observations, we examined how event organizers promoted sustainability at the event, including the contextual and organizational considerations that influenced the interpretations of event sustainability goals. Grounded in signaling theory, the findings revealed that there was a difference in interpretations between bottom-up signals (directly observable) and top-down signals (beliefs and expectations) with respect to the broad understanding of sustainability. These differences were most apparent for spectators concerning social and economic event signals. The directly observable signals emphasized environment-related sustainability, while the top-down signals about social considerations were often overlooked. Event organizers capitalized on some ceremonial moments at the event to bring about greater awareness, but these practices were limited. Event organizers need to consider how to capitalize on both top-down and bottom-up signals to emphasize the sustainability messaging for all stakeholders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it