MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6959568567 · doi:10.11575/prism/30104

Residential Energy Efficiency and the Role of Public Participation

2012· other· en· W6959568567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEfficient energy useEnergy policyPublic policyEnergy conservationRealmEnergy (signal processing)Public participationOrder (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Albertans are currently engaged in a policy debate on approaches to curtail their energy usage through the adoption of energy conservation strategies. Currently in Alberta there are significant energy savings to be captured, stemming from the proper application of energy efficiency technologies. While energy efficiency savings are primarily to be made in the industrial sector, significant and untapped potential energy savings exist in the residential sector. Tapping these energy savings presents a unique challenge for public policy creators, as in order to successfully bring about energy savings in the residential sector a high degree of public engagement is necessary. This high degree of public engagement is necessary due to the problems present in creating a public policy that aims to affect many different users in many different residential situations. In such a realm cookie cutter public policies will fail to target all residential users effectively. As such it should be the policy makers' objective to determine the most effective policy in light of its ability to create engagement within the residential sectors, as engagement of the residential sector will lead to numerous policy benefits including higher compliance rates and cost savings. It is through this public engagement, brought about through public participation in the policy development and implementation process, that households will be empowered to capture the maximum potential benefits of energy efficiency technologies currently present in our market.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology→French-language works237,207→