MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7134710381

UBC Food System Project (UBCFSP) : scenario 4

2008· report· en· W7134710381 on OpenAlexaff
Andy Kou, Arthur Sin, Julie Tench, Gigi Tsui, Anna Wojcik, Mathew Yip

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityFood systemsAgricultureFood supplyFood processingConsumption (sociology)Research programAction (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UBC Food System Project (UBCFSP) is a Community-Based Action Research project (CBAR) based on the collaboration and visioning of all the project stakeholders. The objective of this project is to improve the sustainability of the UBC food system. The purpose of scenario 4 was to propose the incorporation of the UBC Farm produce to the various campus food providers. The project involved a literature review, along with interviews with the UBC Farm and AMS Food and Beverage Department personnel. A review of the UBCFSP vision statements has also been completed in accordance to scenario tasks and requirements. A farm to campus program was improved upon to incorporate UBC Farm carrots into the AMS as a way to promote local food production and consumption. The program will start with a one month supply by the UBC Farm of 25-50% of the AMS total carrot consumption during the month of September. The objective of the program is to raise awareness of the UBC Farm, build support for local agriculture and to involve all students of UBC. Recommendations have been made regarding the various issues that were unable to be addressed within this paper due to resource, time, and project focus constraints. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→French-language works237,207→