Les Accords de Cancún face aux enjeux des négociations internationales sur le climat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La seizième Conférence des Parties (COP16) de la Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur le changement climatique a pris fin le 11 décembre 2010 sur une note positive, alors que les Accords de Cancún ont été adoptés. Afin d’évaluer le résultat de la COP16, cet article se fixe le double objectif de réfléchir aux grands enjeux des négociations sur le climat, puis d’envisager les Accords de Cancún à la lumière de ceux-ci. Ces enjeux sont l’avenir du multilatéralisme, le problème de l’injustice climatique et l’incertitude sur l’architecture légale du futur traité sur le climat. Cette analyse des Accords de Cancún laisse paraître un paradoxe que la prochaine Conférence des Parties devra aborder de front à la fin de 2011.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".