Education, outreach, and codes of conduct to further the norms and obligations of the Chemical Weapons Convention (IUPAC Technical Report)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2002 IUPAC evaluation of scientific and technological advances relevant to the operation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) included a recommendation that greater efforts are required in education and outreach to the worldwide scientific and technical community to increase awareness of the CWC and its benefits. In 2004, the President of IUPAC and the Director-General of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) agreed on a proposal for a joint project on chemistry education, outreach, and the professional conduct of chemists. This led to a joint IUPAC/OPCW international workshop held in Oxford, UK on 9-12 July 2005 with 27 participants from 18 different countries. This report sets out the background to the workshop, the scope of the presentations and discussions, the outcomes of the workshop, and the recommended steps to further chemical education, outreach, and codes of conduct in regard to the obligations of the CWC.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.195 | 0.160 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".