A Global Energy Strategy as a Viable Means for Redressing Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
transport to energy production and consumption3, and affecting not just developed states but also developing ones. The highly complex nature of the problem has led the international community to adopt a comprehensive approach to reduce the generation Of C02 and other greenhouse gases. After an expert meeting in Ottawa in 1989 and discussion of the major elements of a climate change convention by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 19904, negotiations were initiated by UN General Assembly Resolution 45/212 in 1990 and concluded in 1992 with. the adoption of a Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Rio Conference5. The Convention reflects deep differences among the participating states in respect of the measures needed and as to the distribution of responsibilities in addressing the problem. It is not surprising that Article 2 of the Convention which lays down the FCCCs objectives does not aim at a reversal of greenhouse gas emissions but at their stabilisation6. Thus, it seems plausible to suggest that the parties are prepared to tolerate some degree of climate change as inevitable as long as it happens slowly enough to allow adaptation. Building upon this, Article 3 sets out guiding principles and Article 4 formulates the commitments undertaken by parties to the Convention. The guiding principles included in Article 3 of the FCCC reflect the principle of sustainable development which goes beyond the objectives of traditional environmental law but includes three pillars, environmental protection, economic development, and social development, which must go hand-in-hand7. Each of these
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".