MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412261396

Documentation of the Stated Choice Experiment water quality valuation survey used in the Legacies of Agricultural Pollutants (LEAP) project

2021· report· en· W4412261396 on OpenAlexaff
Tobias Holmsgaard Larsen, Søren Bøye Olsen, Thomas Lundhede, Anne K. Jensen, Brian H. Jacobsen, Maria da Conceição Cunha, João Marques, J. M. M. Azevedo, Benoît Dessirier, Josefin Thorslund, Jerker Jarsjö, Roy Brouwer, X. L. Ji, Irene van der Water, N. B. Basu, Kim Van Meter, Philippe Van Cappelen

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) · 2021
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInnovationsfonden
KeywordsValuation (finance)DocumentationAgriculturePollutantWater qualityEnvironmental scienceAgricultural economicsBusinessEconomicsGeographyComputer scienceAccountingArchaeologyChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tobias Holmsgaard Larsen and Søren Bøye Olsen are main responsibles for developing and implementing the overall survey design, developing survey questionniares, developing survey protocols and instructions, and implementing the main data collection, as well as for documenting it all in this report.Maria Cunha, Jerker Jarsjö, Roy Brouwer, and Søren Bøye Olsen have been main responsibles for conducting focus group interviews in Portugal, Sweden, Canada, and Denmark, respectively.Remaining

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1330.048

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 head0.396
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.046 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen)Same topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207