Art. 3.4 des Kyoto-Protokolls: Wie lässt sich die Senkenwirkung des Waldes in der Praxis nachweisen?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2005 und 2006 waren Klimajahre - nicht nur wegen der Temperaturrekorde. Die Genfer Luftreinhaltekonvention feierte 2005 ihr 25-jähriges Jubiläum. Im Februar 2005 trat das Kyoto-Protokoll (KP) in Kraft. In Montreal fand Ende November/Anfang Dezember 2005 die 11. Weltklimakonferenz und die erste Sitzung der Vertragsstaaten des Kyoto-Protokolls statt. Kurz vor Weihnachten 2006 verständigten sich die zuständigen Ministerien für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi), Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (BMU) sowie Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz (BMELV) darauf, die Speicherfähigkeit der deutschen Wälder für das klimaschädliche CO2 auf die nationale Reduktionsverpflichtungen im Rahmen des Artikels 3.4 des Kyoto-Protokolls anrechnen zu lassen; womit neue Wege zur Förderung der Forstwirtschaft offen stehen.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".