Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that has reduced the atmospheric abundances of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) through regulations on national production and consumption of these substances. The regulations have succeeded in protecting the ozone layer from unchecked future emissions of ODSs. As such; the Protocol is perhaps the most successful example of international cooperation on the environment. ODSs are also greenhouse gases that have the potential to change global climate when they accumulate in the atmosphere. Thus; the actions of the Montreal Protocol to protect ozone have also protected future climate and; hence; have provided a dual benefit to society. As for the long-term substitutes for ODSs;hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) do not destroy ozone - but they are greenhouse gases. The increases in HFC emissions that occur in response to Montreal Protocol regulations could be substantial by the mid twenty-first century;offsetting the climate protection already achieved by the Protocol. Avoiding these projected HFC emissions stands as a significant opportunity for international cooperation on protecting future climate.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.014 |
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".