Bibliographic record
Abstract
Announcements at Johannesburg earth summit appear to guarantee the agreement will take force at the end of this year. The Kyoto protocol, which requires industrial countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and offers developing countries incentives to do the same, was adopted in 1997 as an implementation amendment to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. That treaty was adopted at the last earth summit dedicated to sustainable development, in Rio in 1992. The Kyoto Protocol takes force only if ratified by countries contributing 55 percent of the worlds unwanted gas emissions. Russia's statement of intent, together with a similar statement from Canada, seems to guarantee that this criterion will be satisfied. Russia's decision to join the Kyoto regime was hardly a surprise. Because of the economic depression the country suffered after the collapse of Soviet communism, its greenhouse gas emissions have dropped drastically, so that the country already in effect has met Kyoto targets. More significant, perhaps, was Canada's decision to also seek ratification of the agreement. The Kyoto Protocol still faces opposition from some of Canada's provincial governments, but given the country's parliamentary system, in which the will of the governing majority normally holds sway, ratification seems very nearly assured.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".