MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980079378 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.07.002

The Post-Kyoto

2013· article· en· W1980079378 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Ghezloun, A. Saïdane, N. Oucher, S. Chergui

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKyoto ProtocolMandateChinaTreatyGreenhouse gasPosition (finance)NegotiationPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Montreal ProtocolInternational tradeState (computer science)Climate changeEconomyEconomic growthBusinessGeographyLawEconomicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kyoto Protocol, which entered into force on 16 February 2005, commits developed countries to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases by 5% in 2012 compared to 1990. Due to the abstention of the United States and the absence of constraint on Southern countries, the protocol establishes obligations only to countries that represent only 33% of global CO2 emissions. All the diplomatic effort is therefore to seek the commitment of discussion for the period after 2012 since it is likely that neither the United States nor China, nor India will adopt the Kyoto commitments. The participation of emerging countries is imperative. Europe has said his new commitment: at the European Council of 22 and 23 March 2005, Heads of State and Government of Member States concluded that should be considered for the group of developed countries, reduction profiles of about 15% to 30% by 2020. This new European order has nevertheless helped to advance the seminar which brought together in May in Bonn, stakeholders in the climate treaty. This meeting showed that progress was possible: two large southern states, Mexico and South Africa insisted that the next climate conference in Montreal in December adopts a negotiating mandate for a post-Kyoto agreement. The position of China has also evolved: climate change is a reality and a major concern but clean technology transfers from North to South are a prerequisite for engagement of the Southern countries. However, India remains on a more critical position, since it considers that the rich countries “continue to increase their emissions and violate their commitments in relation to financial assistance and technology transfer”. The president of the United States has estimated, July 7, 2005, that there was a consensus between members of the G8 on issues related to climate change, particularly on the need to start discussing commitments to be made for the period which succeed 2012 term of the Kyoto Protocol. This discussion of the future should involve the major emerging countries. The work started in 2005 by the “dialogue” on the long-term concerted action has produced promising results which at the Bali conference in December 2007, were the basis for the establishment of a special working group on the long term concerted action. The essential point of this second negotiation process is to search in the effort to integrate the developing countries and, more particularly, emerging economies such as China, India or Brazil, whose current emissions and/or projected should exceed those of developed countries during the first half of the twenty-first century. In retrospect, the progress obtained on this front is modest but significant, especially following the conference of Cancun in November-December 2010.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.162 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207