Некоторые аспекты межгосударственного сотрудничества по оценке воздействия на окружающую среду в регионе НАФТА между США и Канадой
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Important element of cooperation of the states is questions of environmental protection in the course of regional economic integration. (NAFTA) Canada, Mexico and the USA together with adoption of the constitutive treaty NAFTA developed more than 20 years ago member states of the North American free trade zone and adopted the Agreement NAFTA about cooperation in environment. However not all environmental issues managed to be resolved in this Agreement, including the institute of an assessment of impact on environment which gains the increasing value in ensuring ecological safety didn't develop. The present article considered that as a result today cross-border EIA (An assessment of impact on environment in the region realizes on the basis of the national right of member states NAFTA or on the basis of various bilateral contracts (Canadian-American). Difficulty in application of exclusively national legislation at implementation of cross-border projects consists in absence of accurate rules of action in those places where cross-border influence can take place. Emergence of a number of the interstate disputes concerning application of national norms on an assessment of impact on environment in cross-border projects became result of current situation. It is possible to note existence in the field of an assessment of impact on environment between Canada and the USA of the international agreements concluded at the level of states/provinces, sending to norms of EIA. Authors represented that Canada and the USA have to solve this problem together on the basis of international law for maintenance of ecological safety in the region and preservations of surrounding environment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.008 |
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".