MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6930544623 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14054448

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WATER CONSUMPTION PATTERNS IN BRAZIL AND CANADA

2024· article· en· W6930544623 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable consumptionSustainabilityConsumption (sociology)Asset (computer security)Sustainable developmentContext (archaeology)Consumer behaviourSustainable management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable consumption of natural resources, particularly water, has gained prominence in global governmental agendas. Water, vital for food supply, hygiene, environmental equilibrium, and material asset maintenance, necessitates responsible management to ensure its availability for future generations. This underscores the need to comprehend consumer behaviors related to water, promoting sustainable practices. Motivational factors driving sustainable behavior adoption have been a focus of consumer behavior research. Contextual variables, encompassing social, economic, legal, political, and natural conditions, play pivotal roles in this context. Comparative studies exploring these factors in sustainable behavior adoption have gained significance, shedding light on how contextual designs stimulate sustainable behavior. Research has highlighted the importance of contextual influences on behavior intention and environmental awareness, emphasizing the role of norms, structural factors, environmental knowledge, and degrees of collectivity and individuality in driving sustainable behavior adaptation. This study contributes to the growing body of research in sustainable consumption by examining contextual variables and their impact on water-related consumer behaviors. Through a comparative analysis, it seeks to identify contextual designs that facilitate sustainable behavior adoption and shed light on the influence of norms, environmental knowledge, and collectivity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207