MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413901451 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-3753

Development of GreenDealz: A public engagement toolkit addressing critical raw materials and the EU Green Deal at informal education settings

2025· article· en· W4413901451 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy Blennerhassett, Geertje Schuitema, Fergus McAuliffe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersHorizon 2020HORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeUniversity College DublinEuropean Commission
KeywordsPublic engagementPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsSociologyPublic relationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. One of the most important challenges Europe faces to date is the need for a drastic increase in the extraction, production, and recycling of critical raw materials to meet the demands of renewable energy technologies, as specified in the European Union's climate targets. However, this topic is not widely discussed amongst publics and is underrepresented within the field of informal education and public engagement. This pilot study describes the development of a public engagement toolkit called “GreenDealz” that aims to address this gap. We focus specifically on the festival environment as an informal education setting. GreenDealz was created via an iterative process informed by in-situ data collection across six cultural/arts and science festivals in Ireland. GreenDealz engages informal audiences through a supermarket experience, where participants must choose key critical raw materials to build essential renewable energy technologies and achieve EU climate goals. Evaluation is integrated into the tactile experience of GreenDealz. Embedded assessment measures yield quantitative data that show GreenDealz may significantly enhance audience knowledge of the topic.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainability in Higher EducationFrench-language works237,207