MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1501196208 · doi:10.24926/15529541.3498

You Are Too Soft!: What Can Corporate Social Responsibility Do For Climate Change?

2011· article· en· W1501196208 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Issachar Rosen-Zvi

Bibliographic record

VenueMinnesota journal of law, science & technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKyoto ProtocolSummitClimate changeGreenhouse gasPresidential systemPolitical scienceParliamentChinaMontreal ProtocolEarth SummitInternational communityUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangePolitical economy of climate changeGlobal warmingPolitical economyEconomyInternational tradeSustainable developmentBusinessPoliticsEconomicsLawGeographyOzone layerMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the run-up to the global climate summit in Copenhagen (COP-15), 1 environmentalists, scientists, and politicians referred to it as a historical event.As COP-15 drew near, climate change activists and United Nations (UN) officials had high hopes that December 2009 would be a watershed moment for creating a new carbon-restricted global economy for decades to come.Furthermore, following the result of the 2008 American presidential elections, many in the international community felt that the path was clear to finally include the United States in the agreement that would replace the Kyoto Protocol, 2 and that developing nations-among them China and India-would also take on some binding and enforceable restrictions on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.The European Parliament even had lofty expectations that an

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.062 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinnesota journal of law, science & technologySame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207