MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071468998

Stockton Rising: 2023 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant

2023· article· en· W7071468998 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQR Code Applications and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Energy EfficiencyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTransformative learningLegislatureDisadvantagedTransformational leadershipState (computer science)Conference of the partiesGlobeClimate changeCommission
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(TCC) is an innovative investment in community-scale climate action, with potentially broad implications. Launched in 2017 by the California State Legislature, TCC funds the implementation of neighborhood-level transformative plans that include multiple coordinated projects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The program is also designed to provide an array of local economic, environmental, and health benefits to disadvantaged communities, while minimizing the risk of displacement. TCC empowers the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to enact transformational change — all with data-driven milestones and measurable outcomes. The California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) serves as the lead administrator of TCC. At the time of this report, SGC has awarded 11 TCC implementation grants to 11 communities across the state (ranging from $9.1 million to $66.5 million per site). Additionally, SGC has awarded 25 TCC planning grants to communities that are in the early stages of forming a coalition to address local climate action goals (ranging from $94,000 to $300,000 per site). The state legislature has allocated funding to distribute two additional rounds of TCC grants.1 The UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation (LCI) serves as the lead evaluator in five communities that have received TCC implementation grants: all three Round 1 sites (Fresno, Ontario, and Watts), one Round 2 site (Northeast San Fernando Valley), and one Round 3 site (Stockton). LCI researchers are working with these communities to document their progress and evaluate the impacts of TCC investments. This progress report is the second in a series of three that will provide an overview of the key accomplishments and estimated benefits of TCC activities in Stockton, collectively referred to as Stockton Rising.2 This specific report documents progress through the end of fiscal year (FY) 2021-2022, which overlaps with about six months of post-award planning (June to December of 2020), and 18 months of grant implementation (January 2021 to June of 2022). Much of implementation has occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, so project partners’ responses to the pandemic are also highlighted throughout the report.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1190.040

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicQR Code Applications and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207