A joint Japan–China research project for reducing pollution in China in the context of the Kyoto Protocol clean development mechanism (CDM): case study of the desulfurdized bio‐coal briquette experiments in Shenyang and Chengdu
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Kyoto Protocol agreed on in 1997 allows some flexibility for developed countries in their implementations of their commitments to reduce emissions of CO2 and other global warming gases. In particular developed countries may receive emission credits for facilitating international cooperation for developing clean development mechanisms (CDMs) between themselves and developing countries. CDMs must reduce emissions of global warming gases on a sustainable basis in the developing countries involved. Such CDMs are expected to be an important tool for Japan and other developed countries for achieving their Kyoto Protocol commitments to reduce their CO2 emissions, but assessments and implementations of alternative CDMs require careful international joint research efforts. In this paper, we discuss our on‐going Japan–China joint research to develop and evaluate bio‐coal briquette (biobriquette), a new product to replace coal in some regions of China. Coal is a significant source of air pollution in China. The introduction of biobriquette use in China as a possible CDM for Japan is also discussed. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".