<b>York Region, Ontario Recycling Awareness for Common Household Items</b>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recycling is a critical component of waste reduction and environmental sustainability. This study investigates the awareness of recyclable household items among residents of York Region, Ontario. A survey of 180 York region residents assessed their understanding of the recyclability of ten common household items based on York Region’s recycling guidelines, as seen in the Bindicator website (York Region, 2023). The findings reveal high recognition of recyclable items such as single-use plastic water bottles and mason jars, with 95% of respondents identifying them correctly. However, significant confusion exists regarding certain plastics, including black plastic and plastic cutlery, where correct responses ranged from 52.2% to 67.8%. Chi-square analysis (p<0.05) showed statistically significant discrepancies between expected and observed recycling knowledge for these items, indicating gaps in public awareness despite wide program accessibility. This study demonstrates that there is a need for improved labeling, clearer recycling guidelines and enhanced public educational initiatives to address misconceptions about plastic recyclability. Future research should examine the influence of demographic factors, regional policy variations, and a broader range of household items to better inform strategies for improving recycling outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".