MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412411851 · doi:10.31603/bishss.91

Analysis of public awareness on global warming: Forecasting using Google Trends and FB prophet

2024· article· en· W4412411851 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBIS Humanities and Social Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal warmingEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeographyClimatologyClimate changeOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global warming is a world problem that must be solved jointly by all countries in the world. Public awareness of global warming shows a decreasing trend over time, as shown in the global community's search results for the keyword global warming which tends to decrease in number. So, research must be carried out to find out the causes of the decline in global public awareness of this issue. This research aims to predict several keywords related to global warming and try to find the reasons why world public awareness tends to continue to decline. This research uses Google Trends to retrieve the dataset and uses the FB prophet model as a forecasting algorithm in machine learning. The research results show that the trend in people's searches for the keyword "global warming" will tend to decline over the next year. Another finding is that there are contradictory keywords on Google Trends that tend to increase, namely "evidence of global warming" and "why climate change is fake". The MAPE (Mean Average Percentage Error) score for the two contradictory keywords is 0.16 and 0.15. Another finding is, if the search dataset on Google Trends has a high fluctuating number of searches, additional columns can be added to the dataset by using the max function to combine several related keywords to retrieve the highest number of searches. Added max column can increase MAPE score in forecasting results. The MAPE score in the max column is 0.159. Another finding was that contradictory keywords on Google Trends came from South Africa, America, Australia, the Philippines, England, Canada, Vietnam, and India.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.279
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.145 · 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