Explore

Plant-based PQ: Request to evaluators

ChatGPTpro report on differences between scanner data papers

Note: this page is publicly accessible

Steps

1. Consider the PQ framing and background

State your initial beliefs about the Pivotal Questions.

To see the canonical statement of this PQ, its subquestions, and the specific operationalized questions for evaluators to consider, click

here⁠

, and use the filter bar to select this PQ.

Express these beliefs:

In Metaculus, for the relevant questions

see each entry in the ‘Metaculus link’ column

here⁠

, which should take you to our

Metaculus community page⁠

⁠

and in

this form⁠

, also sharing your Metaculus ID in the form.

Provide a brief discussion of the reasoning behind your stated beliefs (in either space)

[Embed survey forms here]

2. Consider and ‘rank’ papers/projects for PQ usefulness

Consider the papers and syntheses

for this PQ here⁠

You may have been asked to focus on a subset of these only. If so, please ignore the others.

You don’t have to read each in full. Use your best judgment; feel free to use NotebookLM (we share a notebook

here⁠

) to extract summaries and query key features of each. You can use other LLM tools if you wish, but please be transparent about your use and do not rely on them for final judgments. (See our initially proposed AI use policy

here⁠

If there’s a paper not on this list that you know is particularly relevant to the pivotal question, please let us know immediately.

Please consider and discuss in your response:

Why (and to what extent) do you think these come to different results from one another?

You can use

this NotebookLM⁠

to query and compare all of the papers

You can consult the GPT “deep research report”

we produced here⁠

, summarized in

ChatGPTpro report on differences between scanner data papers⁠

to get an overall picture of what they did differently.

Which approaches and assumptions do you find most plausible, and why?

Rank or otherwise assess the credibility of these in terms of their implications for the pivotal question.

Explain and discuss your reasoning (at least briefly); what choices do some of these make correctly/incorrectly etc?

[Embed survey/form here]

3. Evaluate one paper/project, or a small subset of these carefully

For the paper (or a few papers— this may depend on step 2) you find most credible and useful, do a careful evaluation of this work, largely following The Unjournal’s (applied stream)

guidelines⁠

but focusing on the implications for the Pivotal Question.

Some things to consider (add specifics here)

[Link “PQ evaluation form” here]

4. State and justify your (revised) beliefs about the PQ in light of this evaluation and your work above

[Embed survey forms here]

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.