The Equality and Effectiveness of Global Public Resources Allocation -- The Kyoto Protocol Trading away Global Warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atmosphere is a kind of global public resources. As climate change is a global issue, every country is responsible for its abatement. Although many nations have common interests, inequalities exist in terms of social, economic and environmental considerations. The equability of the Kyoto Protocol involve structural differences and emission accountability. Enhanced global warming is the result of decades of increased greenhouse gases emissions from developed countries, so reducing emissions is primarily their responsibility. In the Kyoto Protocol, trading allows nations who can reduce emissions at low costs to reduce their emissions below their allowable emissions and sell their surplus international emission allowance to other countries, thus reducing the overall cost of compliance but achieving the same end. Although China, the second largest greenhouse emission country, has not been claimed for reducing the greenhouse emission by the Kyoto Protocol, it provides China a huge amount of chances to adjust the structure of energy, to improve the current deteriorated ecological environment, and to carry out the sustainable development strategy through CDM projects by introducing the fund and technology from advanced countries.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".