Long term cost-effectiveness of resilient foods for global catastrophes compared to artificial general intelligence
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0)?
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?
Skip to main content
Evaluation Summary and Metrics: "Long Term Cost-Effectiveness of Resilient Foods for Global Catastrophes Compared to Artificial General Intelligence Safety"
Evaluation Summary and Metrics: "Long Term Cost-Effectiveness of Resilient Foods for Global Catastrophes Compared to Artificial General Intelligence Safety"
Published onMay 12, 2023
Evaluation Summary and Metrics: "Long Term Cost-Effectiveness of Resilient Foods for Global Catastrophes Compared to Artificial General Intelligence Safety"
Preamble
Paper: Long term cost-effectiveness of resilient foods for global catastrophes compared to artificial general intelligence safety. David Denkenberger, Anders Sandberg, Ross John Tieman and Joshua M. Pearce in International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (Vol. 73 ). 2022.
We organised three evaluations of this paper (1. Alex Bates 2. Anca Hanea 3. Scott Janzwood). To read the evaluations please click the link at the bottom.
Metrics
Ratings
Evaluator 1 (of 3) Alex Bates | Evaluator 2 Anca Hanea | Evaluator 3 Scott Janzwood | ||||||
Rating category | Rating (0-100) | 90% CI (0-100)* | Comments | Rating (0-100) | 90% CI (0-100)* | Comments | Rating (0-100) | Confidence |
Overall assessment | 40 | 20-60 | 1 | 80 | 60-90 | 65 | Medium | |
Advancing knowledge and practice | 30 | 20-60 | 2 | 80 | 70-90 | 70 | Medium | |
Methods: Justification, reasonableness, validity, robustness | 50 | 40-60 | 3 | 70 (60+80+70+70/4) | 50-90 | 4 | Not qualified | |
Logic & communication | 60 | 40-75 | 5 | 85 (90 +80)/2 | 65-95 | 6 | 80 | Medium-to-high |
Open, collaborative, replicable | 40-75 | 7 | 73 ((80+80+60)/3) | 50-95 | 8 | Not qualified | ||
Relevance to global priorities | 90 | 60-95 | 9 | 85 | 70-90 | 80 | High |
Predictions
Alex Bates | Anca Hanea | Scott Janzwood | |||||
Prediction metric | Rating (0-5) | 90% CI (0-5)* | Rating (0-5) | 90% CI (0-5)* | Comments | Rating (0-5) | Confidence |
What ‘quality journal’ do you expect this work will be published in? | 2 | 1-2 | 3.5 | 3-5 | 10 | 3.5 | Medium |
On a ‘scale of journals’, what tier journal should this be published in? | 2 | 1-2 | 4 | 3-5 | 3.5 | High |
