MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028743167

Funding water utility system improvements in rural British Columbia: How much are residents willing to pay?

2011· article· en· W7028743167 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWillingness to payWater utilityWater qualitySocioeconomic statusQuality (philosophy)Household incomeWater supplyWaterborne diseases
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water delivered by the Savona, BC utility system routinely fails to meet quality standards mandated by Health Canada resulting in extensive water quality advisories and boil water notices. By analyzing socioeconomic attributes such as household income and family size, in combination with environmental factors associated with water quality, the willingness to pay for improvements to the community delivery system was estimated. Using the contingent-valuation survey method, we determined that the majority of residents were unwilling to pay to improve municipal water quality and those that were willing, will on average pay an additional $8.36 in monthly fees. The presence of children in a household, income, and gender had a large impact on the probability that an individual would be willing to pay while the perception of water quality was less influential.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207