MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271805363

A Compliance System for the Kyoto Protocol

2001· article· en· W2271805363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rose Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of New South Wales law journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKyoto ProtocolCompliance (psychology)ConventionProtocol (science)United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeMontreal ProtocolPlan (archaeology)Project commissioningAction planPublishingPolitical scienceClimate changeLawEngineeringManagementEconomicsMeteorologyGeographyOzone layer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol have taken steps to develop a robust compliance regime. Under the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (BAPA), adopted at the Fourth Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, agreed on steps to prepare for the Kyoto Protocol, including development of a compliance system and to implement the parts of the BAPA dealing with Kyoto Protocol compliance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0140.019
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0150.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.009

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of New South Wales law journalSame topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207