Review of <i>Climate change: the science, impacts and solutions</i>, by A. Barrie Pittock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is almost the resort of rascals to claim at the beginning of a book review that “the subject of this book has never been more topical and its publication could not be more timely”. Nonetheless, neither Barrie Pittock nor I are rascals, and the above statement is true. In fact, as I write this review, the Australian Senate, which has been held back from its Christmas recess to complete its debate on a bill to initiate greenhouse gas emissions reduction, is arguing about the cause and its possible cure. I wish I could have every member of the Senate (especially the dissenters in the Liberal Party) read the 350 pages of Barrie’s excellent book. Of course, as with all good books, they could simply read Chapter 1 “Climate change matters” and Chapter 12 “Accepting the challenge”, but as these rascals are politicians it might also be useful for them to read Chapter 10, entitled “The politics of greenhouse”.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".