MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413140727 · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-62029-w

A systemic risk assessment methodological framework for the global polycrisis

2025· review· en· W4413140727 on OpenAlexaff
Ajay Gambhir, Michael Albert, Sylvanus S. P. Doe, Jonathan F. Donges, Nadim Farajalla, Leandro Luiz Giatti, Haripriya Gundimeda, Sarah Hendel-Blackford, Thomas Homer‐Dixon, Daniël Hoyer, David Jácome Polit, Luke Kemp, David Korowicz, Zora Kovacic, Jan Kwakkel, Laurie Laybourn‐Langton, Robert J. Lempert, Ayan Mahamoud, Tom H. Oliver, Ivana E Pavkova, Joseph Ponnoly, Vishwas Satgar, Megan L. Shipman, Jana Sillmann, Samuel Stevenson, Ruth Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsGeneral Dynamics (Canada)Royal Roads University
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoEuropean CommissionV. Kann Rasmussen Foundation
KeywordsSystemic riskComputational biologyComputer scienceRisk assessmentBiologyEconomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0160.012
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyFrench-language works237,207