dataesr/scientific-paragraphs-categorization huggingface dataset:
Green waste The lawn areas from public parks and private gardens are identified with remote sensing approach, a method used for extracting spatial objects from aerial or satellite images  (Campbell and Wynne, 2011). The analysis is based on ortho-images, available at a higher resolution than the satellite images (less than 1 m compared to 15 me30 m for Landsat 8; and 10 me60 m for Sentinel 2A). Several studies  (Bork and Su, 2007; Parent et al. , 2015; Rampi et al. , 2014) , also showed that the accuracy of the image classification can be improved by the integration of Lidar data or nDSM (normalized digital surface model) to the multispectral imagery. Since the Lidar data have become more widely available in the recent years, this additional information is included in the present study. With high-resolution images, the pixels are usually smaller than the spatial objects studied (e.
Canteens of schools The list of schools and their location are usually provided by the relevant administration. If not available, this information can be extracted from OSM database. The number of meals served in the canteens is provided by administrative services or estimated with the number of students present (official databases, websites about the educational system) and the number of meals taken per students (equation (  15 )). Nb meals:y À1 ¼ Nb students Â Nb meals:student À1 :day À1 Â Nb days of schools:y À1 (15).
Canteens of health facilities The lists of health facilities are usually provided by the relevant administration or it can be extracted from the OSM. The number of meals is calculated with the number of people taking the meals in each facility, including the number of patients and, for the hospitals, the number of employees  (ADEME, 2013). In hospitals, the number of patients is estimated using the number of bed installed in each facility, with the assumption that 100% of the beds available are occupied all year long. Information on the number of beds installed can be provided by the appropriate administration or by websites gathering detailed data on health facilities (e. g. www. sanitaire-social. com in France). The number of meals eaten by the patients is calculated with the number of beds in a given facility, multiplied by the number of meals served per year (equation (  16 )).
Restaurants and collective catering services The list of restaurants and catering services is extracted from the official register of companies or from OSM database. The distinction between the two types of restaurants is done in the register of companies but usually not in other sources as OSM. The Fast-foods are not included in this inventory because: 1) the FW is usually collected with packaging and 2) some consumers take away their food and dispose the waste in unknown locations. The number of meals is estimated with the number of employees of the restaurants (kitchen staff) and the number of meals served per employee (equation (  19 )) (ADEME, 2013). Nb meals:y À1 ¼ Nb employees Â Nb meals:employee À1 :y À1 The number of meals served per employee is greater in collective catering services than in restaurants (ADEME, 2013) (e.
Inventory of peri-urban farms The locations and the areas of the agricultural plots are extracted from the official register of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in Europe, from land use databases (Corine Land Cover), or from national databases. The small vegetable farms not identified in CAP and in land use databases can be extracted from official registers of companies (e. g. SIREN database in France). In the latter case, the agricultural area is estimated with official farm statistics.
y À1 ) The Nitrate directive (Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991) limits the use of organic fertilizer in agricultural plots presenting a high risk of nitrate pollution. The details of the regulations are country-specific, but usually two criteria are included: the slopes and the distance to surface water. The average slope of each agricultural plot is estimated with a digital elevation model. The surface waters are extracted from national or OSM databases. Moreover, the general regulation states that the spreading should not occur close from housing. The quantity of nitrogen from livestock manure is estimated for each municipality with the livestock census data and the ratio of nitrogen production per capita and per type of animal  (Laurent, 2015). In EU countries, the sludge from wastewater can also be used as an organic fertilizer, except in vegetable farms.
Inventory of the outputs: peri-urban farms The location and the shape of the agricultural parcels were extracted from the Graphical Parcel Register (RPG). The RPG was completed for the vegetable farms with the SIREN database 1  for their locations and an average of crop surfaces from the Agreste database. 2 In GL, 64% of the agricultural lands were located inside Nitrate Vulnerable Zones, and for the study, all farms were considered under the directive nitrate regulation. The restricted areas for digestate spreading were built with the IGN BD Topo and BD Alti databases. The remaining agricultural areas covered 9085 ha, 91% of the total agricultural land in GL (10,035 ha). Based on the official livestock census (Agreste) and the ratio of nitrogen production per capita  (Laurent, 2015) , the total production of nitrogen from the livestock in GL was estimated to 104.
8 t y À1 and the nitrogen load to 11. 2 kg N. ha À1. The location and characteristics of the wastewater treatment plants (2014 and updated in 2015) was made available by the Ministry of Ecological and Solidarity Transition, 3  a more accurate source than the generic EU database. The analysis was simplified by selecting only the plants located inside GL. The database details the uses of the sludge for each plant and only the sludge classified as "agricultural spreading" and compost was retained for this analysis. The content of nitrogen of the different materials was given by the MAFOR reference  (Benoît et al. , 2014). Due to the complexity and the uncertainties of the wastewater database, the different materials were gathered in three groups with an estimation of their respective nitrogen content: the sludge limed (37.
Discussion on the method developed The GIS inventory had to overcome two main challenges: 1) the sources need to be located accurately, at least at the neighborhood level, and 2) the biowaste produced by each source has to be estimated with a method adapted to the type of source. These challenges were tackled by adapting methodologies at the target geographical scale, using suitable databases and disaggregating data when required. These methods involved many individual steps and were based on numerous assumptions that might have impacted the accuracy of the model outcomes. The sources of biowaste were generally accurately located while the estimate of the biowaste generation was much more prone to errors. Some inventory tasks remain complex. Hence, the remote sensing analysis is tedious and its relevance should be assessed in regard to the time invested.
The participants' nationalities included American, Belgian, Bulgarian, Canadian, Chinese, Dutch, French, Indian, Italian, Polish, Portuguese, Scottish, Singaporean, Slovenian and Ukrainian. They had different socio-economic and educational backgrounds: high school qualifications (including bartenders, a taxi driver, a bus driver, active and retired sales consultants/representatives, entrepreneurs, and a warden); higher education degrees (including financiers, a lecturer, school administrators, key accounts managers, and a consultant); and customers studying for higher education degrees (including undergraduate and postgraduate social sciences and sciences students). Before the horsemeat scandal, all participating customers were meat-eaters. We collected data approximately eighteen months after the scandal first came to light which enabled us to capture the complete process of trust breakdown, repair and rebuilding that evolved over time.
In semi-structured interviews we asked our interviewees to "tell their stories" about their trust recovery  (Morse, 2001). Interviews lasted 40-70 minutes each and we used the principles of cognitive interviewing  (Fisher & Geiselman, 2010; Memon & Bull, 1991). We chose this approach because of its effectiveness in retrieving people's memories  (Fisher & Geiselman, 2010; Memon & Bull, 1991). We digitally recorded the interviews and transcribed them verbatim. By the time we reached 37 interviews we noted that conceptualization of the data had solidified to such a degree that the in-progress theoretical framework captured most of the incoming data. Nevertheless, we continued the interviewing process to remain open to any new insights, and concluded data collection after interviewing 51 participants.
Ensuring rigor To ensure rigor we followed  Lincoln and Guba's (1985)  well-known criteria for conducting inductive research (i. e. credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability). We followed all steps and guidelines prescribed by the grounded theory method  (Charmaz, 2006; Glaser, 1978; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Locke, 2001)  including line-by-line coding, constant comparison, non-leading questions, memoing and diagraming. This ensured that the theoretical framework we developed is grounded in many empirical indicators covering a wide range of empirical observations, and thus reflects participants' experiences of trust recovery. In addition, to ensure rigor, we audio-recorded all interviews, read interview transcripts multiple times, asked participants for clarifications (where necessary), presented our findings to several participants, kept analytical diaries, ensured participant confidentiality, and managed data systematically using NVivo 10.
We also identified data instances where customers referred to the broader context within which the trust violation took place. We labeled this 'the institutional context'. Specifically, customers assigned importance to the fact that the scandal occurred in the UK, as it has a well-established legal framework and institutions such as the food authorities and NGOs that monitor what organizations are doing, low corruption rates and independent media. For example, customer 48 stressed the importance of the fact that "the horsemeat scandal took place here in the UK", because he believed that "the UK media is independent and there are governmental agencies which regulate and control the retailers". Similarly, customer 32 contrasted the UK's institutional context with that of other countries and noted that in some there "is high corruption and well-connected businesses do not necessarily comply with the rules".
Limitations and future research This research should be interpreted with consideration of its limitations. It is a retrospective study, which may be the only viable way to study trust recovery, due to the difficulty of predicting trust failures and obtaining access to 'live' trust repair  (Gillespie et al. , 2014; Weick, 1990). We used interviews to collect data about participants' recent experiences involving their trust in selected food retailers. The problem with this approach is that memory is fallible, and collected data may include "historical reconstruction" under the influence of subsequent experiences  (Blaikie, 2009). To address this concern, we collected data eighteen months after the scandal first came to light, and participants remembered the scandal well (corroborated by newspaper articles and other published information about the scandal).
Introduction Workflow technology also known as Business Process Management (BPM) technology, aims at automating business processes. A business process is a set of tasks that follow a specific pattern and are executed to achieve a specific goal  [1]. When such processes are managed electronically, they are called workflows. To automate business processes, workflow technology provides a clear framework composed of two major entities: (1) a workflow language for the description of such processes in a (generally graphical) format that can be interpreted by (2) a software system called Workflow Management System (WfMS). The role of WfMS is to facilitate collaboration and coordination of various actors involved in the distributed execution of processes' tasks: in this way, workflow technology reduces the automation of business processes to their modelling in workflow languages; process modelling (specification) is therefore a crucial phase of workflow management 1.
Another mentioned shortcoming of existing process modelling approaches is that they concentrate the modelling of a given process into a single task graph. This does not allow designers to explicitly express the entire control flow of certain types of processes; in addition, the resulting specifications are generally not easy to read, to maintain and to evolve. These concerns were first raised by Wil M. P. van der Aalst et al. [7, 8]. All these shortcomings of traditional workflow languages confirm that there is still a need of scientific innovation in the field of business process modelling. This paper presents a new Language for the Specification of Administrative Workflow Processes (LSAWfP) based on the concept of attributed grammars. LSAWfP is built in a more traditional way and then, unlike the artifact-centric approaches, it allows process modelling independently of a workflow execution technique.
Opposed to traditional workflow languages, LSAWfP provides coherent tools to model both processes' lifecycle model, information model and organizational model. LSAWfP is particularly interested in administrative process 2 modelling as this type of process is the most frequently encountered in organizations  [9, 10]. A given administrative process is naturally composed of a set of execution scenarios; an execution scenario (or simply scenario) is an ordered subset of activities that, once executed, lead the process to one of its end states, whether or not a business goal is achieved. In LSAWfP, the execution scenarios of a given administrative process are represented by a finite set S 1 ad ,. , S k ad of so-called representative scenarios known in advance; representative scenario refers to any execution scenario that, in "combination" with some other representative scenarios, can generate a (potentially infinite) set of other scenarios (see sec.
3. 2. 1). Therefore, LSAWfP uses the scenario as the modelling unit: a given process modelling consists to the modelling of each of its execution scenarios. Designers can thus focus on the modelling and the maintenance of process' parts rather than handling the whole process at a time: this seems to be more intuitive, modular and easier. To use LSAWfP, the process to be modelled must be well understood by the designer; its tasks and their sequences, the data they produce and the actors taking part in their execution must be known in advance (administrative processes). In addition to these elements related to the lifecycle, the information model and the organizational model of the processes, the designer must be able to identify its various execution scenarios. The modelling approach (methodology) of LSAWfP can be described as follows: from the observation that one can analyse the textual description of a given administrative process to exhibit all its possible representative scenarios leading to its business goals, LSAWfP proposes to model each of these scenarios by an annotated tree called a representative artifact in which, each node corresponds to a task of the process, and each hierarchical decomposition (a node and its sons) represents a scheduling of these tasks.
These lists aim at modelling actors, their roles and the different perceptions they have on a given process. Thus, with LSAWfP, the model (subsequently called a Grammatical Model of Administrative Workflow Process -GMAWfP -) of a given administrative process P ad is an executable grammatical specification given by a triplet W f = (G, L P k , L A k ). The rest of this manuscript is organised as follows: after presenting some basic concepts, some related works and a running example (the peer-review process) in section 2, we present more formally and with illustrations, the proposed language in section 3 and we discuss its expressiveness. A presentation of some ongoing works is conducted in section 4; in particular, we briefly present one of our current works that reinforces the justification of the need to produce a new workflow language.
In the ADEPT multi-agent system, process logic is expressed in the so-called service definition language (SDL); the resulting model is such as at runtime, agents have sufficient freedom to take alternative execution paths (from the model) to complete the process goal. As mentioned in the introduction, for the last two decades, a lot of work on process modelling has been done on the artifact-centric paradigm  [6, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26]. This paradigm was introduced by IBM through the work of Nigam and Caswell  [6]. It recommends that, when modelling processes, one should focus on modelling a data structure called artifact that can give information both on the execution state of a process instance at a given time, and on the "how" to make this state evolve. Hull et al. [18]  extends the artifact-centric model of  [6]  to provide an interoperation framework in which data are hosted on central infrastructures named artifact-centric hubs.
They propose mechanisms (including user views) for controlling access to these data. Lohmann and Wolf  [19]  provide a choreography-like framework for artifact-centric interoperation. They abandon the fact of having a single artifact hub  [18]  and they introduce the idea of having several agents which operates on artifacts. Some of those artifacts are mobile; thus, the authors provide a systematic approach for modelling artifact location and its impact on the accessibility of actions using a Petri net. Badouel et al. [23, 24]  introduce a flexible framework for data-centric case management. Their model puts stress on modelling process data and users as first class citizens. As for LSAWfP, they use an attributed grammar (named Guarded Attribute Grammar -GAG -) as the mathematical foundation of their model.
Each diagram resumes the main scenarios of the studied process. The purpose of this figure is to show the independence of our running example from a specific workflow language; in addition, we want the reader to bear in mind what the two workflow languages used in this figure offer in terms of process modelling tools and methodology in order to better understand the contributions of LSAWfP. It can be seen that with both formalisms, the modelling of all scenarios is tackled at the same time and process data is treated in background or not at all. With BPMN, the organizational aspect highlights the actors and the tasks assigned to them, but nothing more. The organizational aspect is absent with the WF-Net formalism; however, the control flow is more expressive because it highlights the different states of the process after the execution of each task.
An Information Model for LSAWfP As formalized in definition 2, a GMWf perfectly models the tasks and control flow of administrative processes (lifecycle model). In this section we discuss the specification of processes-related data (the information model) in LSAWfP. It is not easy to model the structure of business processes data using a general type as they differ from one process to another. For the current work, tackling the processes data structure has no proven interest because it does not bring any added value to the proposed model since, we are not specifically interested in data modelling but rather in process modelling: a representation of these data using a set of variables associated with tasks is largely sufficient. However, it should be noted that in existing data-driven modelling approaches like the Guarded Attribute Grammar (GAG) model  [24, 37, 38] , each task comes equipped with a set of inherited attributes (terms over a ranked alphabet) and a set of synthesised attributes where: inherited attributes represents input data (i.
e, necessary data for the associated task to be executed) while synthesised attributes represents output data (i. e, data that are produced after the task being executed). In addition, dependency relationships between data (attributes) are often specified. In this work, the potentially manipulated data by a given process task is represented using a single attribute embedded in the nodes associated with it. This is more than enough to show that LSAWfP cares about processes' data (this is one of this paper's goals). In more specific (future) work, the form of this attribute can be simply refined (as in the GAG approach  [24, 37, 38] ) to allow designers to better describe the nature of the manipulated data and their impact on processes. To formalize the taking into account of attributes, we update for the last time the definition of GMWf.
On the Expressiveness of LSAWfP Let's consider a specification W f = (G, L P k , L A k ) of a given business process P ad. As described above, its organizational model that expresses and classifies/assigns the resources that must execute its tasks is given by the couple (L P k , L A k ) of W f. Its informational model that describes the data structure being manipulated is given by the type of the attribute status associated with each task. Its lifecycle model that provides information on tasks and their sequencing (coordination) is given by the GMWf  G of W f. Thus, we can conclude that LSAWfP has the major expected characteristics of a workflow language according to  [1]. The GMWf effectively allows the designers to specify all the basic control flows (sequential, parallel, alternative and iterative) which can be found in traditional workflow languages.
For example, the proclet approach  [7]  requires the designer to take into account aspects related to communication (ports, channels, etc. ) between the entities in N et al. charge of executing tasks (the proclets). The approach in  [19]  imposes to express also artifacts' locations (artifacts can be mobile or not). The expressiveness of LSAWfP does not allow the designer to specify such aspects. The language LSAWfP has several interesting features in addition to its expressiveness; in particular: -Its ability to represent scenarios using simple graphs (annotated trees) where existing languages use graphical formalisms (arbitrary graphs) that are more complex to implement; -Its semi-declarative approach which would like the designer to describe the scheduling of a subset of tasks in a given production without expressing how the whole set of tasks is performed procedurally; -Its usage of accreditations to model organizational aspects of process, making it particularly suitable for the modelling of administrative processes; -Its modular approach using the scenario as the modelling unit; -Its solid mathematical foundation mainly made up of a grammatical model that can be studied formally in the same way as Petri nets, while benefiting from the executable character that is recognized in such a tool.
-The highlighted conceptual model: we specify which of the informational, organizational and lifecycle models is emphasized by the considered language. -The implementation: here we specify whether the language has an implementation or not. -The independence regarding an execution technique: we specify if the language does not take into account aspects related to the technique and execution environment of the modelled processes. These comparison criteria are not exhaustive and it is necessary to conduct a further study in order to better compare these languages. It would also be more appropriate to consider several other languages in this comparative study. The LSAWfP language as presented here, is not perfect. The first criticisms we can make are the following: -The organizational and informational models of LSAWfP formalized in this paper are quite simple.