Retraction: Does resource efficiency matter for environmental quality in Canada?
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Post-publication record
OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
A Retraction of Community Case StudyCitation: Kirikkaleli D, Castanho RA, Deniz Özbay R, Yilmaz Genc S and Ahmed Z (2023) Does resource efficiency matter for environmental quality in Canada?. Front. Environ. Sci. 11:1276632. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1276632The journal retracts the 2023 article cited above. Frontiers Research Integrity Auditing team has investigated and uncovered a network of authors and editors who conducted peer review with undisclosed conflicts of interest and who have engaged in citation manipulation. The investigation identified this article as one for which the integrity of the peer review process has been undermined, resulting in the loss of confidence in the article's findings.The authors received a communication regarding the retraction and were given a chance to respond, with some discussions still ongoing. This exchange has been recorded by the publisher. The investigation was not able to determine whether all authors, editors, or reviewers were aware of or involved in the misconduct, but this misconduct was significant enough to determine that the scientific integrity of the article cannot be guaranteed.In adherence to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the article is retracted. The retraction was approved by the Chief Executive Editor at Frontiers and the Field Chief Editor of Frontiers in Environmental Science.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Frontiers in Environmental Science
- Topic
- Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
- Field
- Energy
- Canadian institutions
- —
- Funders
- —
- Keywords
- Resource (disambiguation)Quality (philosophy)Environmental qualityEnvironmental scienceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental economicsEcologyComputer scienceEconomicsBiology
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes