The Necessity of Preventing Unilateral Responses to Water Scarcity - The Next Major Threat against Mankind this Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We never thought that the Great Lakes could run out of water, as we always conjured up an image of large ice masses retreating and carving out huge geographic areas that are now filled with water. In addition, the idea did not occur to us that water scarcity could cause serious environmental problems. Contrast this with other provisions of the Convention which give geographically disadvantaged entitlements to equitable shares of natural resources in the jurisdiction of other States, thereby reflecting the have's and the have not's of natural resource allocation. The question of whether the United States and Canada should be allowed to unilaterally declare that the sale of fresh water from the Great Lakes should not take place rests largely upon the ecosystem of the area and any environmental problems inherent to that ecosystem. Likewise, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Environment Canada are joining forces to reduce pollutants in the Lake Superior Basin. The experts will test samples of the lake's bottom, river sediments, air, plants, and fish taken from numerous points throughout the lake.
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 | 0.014 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".