The Comparative Studies on China and Canada:Energy Security and Environmental Protection Policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By comparing China and Canada in basic indicators of energy and environmental policy,the article finds that China′s energy security is much lower than Canada′s,which shows the latter has greater intensity of consumption,too fast growth of energy consumption,lower storage of main energy,higher concentration of energy imports,less days of strategic reserves and higher proportion of fossil energy,etc.But,what is gratifying is that the government policy on developing and utilizing renewable energy is to be a strong push.Anyway,for China,the most effective way to reduce the dependence on foreign and gas and to reduce carbon emissions is: promoting the use of renewable energy and clean energy to increase their share in the energy structure;doing RD on coal to oil technology to reduce pollution of fossil energy in the course of extraction,refining and consumption;promoting technology innovation to reduce energy consumption rate in production;increasing technologies introduction in new energy,personnel training and exchanges,equipment services and joint research.In these respects,China and Canada have a broad space and potential for cooperation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".