MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747878240 · doi:10.1071/aj14053

Australian climate change policy—where to from here?

2015· article· en· W2747878240 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe APPEA Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthClimate changeGovernment (linguistics)Emissions tradingClimate policyGreenhouse gasBusinessPoliticsEnergy policyPolitical scienceEconomicsNatural resource economicsEngineeringRenewable energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past decade, Australia’s approach to climate change policy has been erratic. Both major political parties announced support for a domestic emissions trading scheme (ETS) in 2007, but bipartisan agreement evaporated in 2009. An ETS was established in 2011, but was repealed in 2014. The Commonwealth Government has subsequently introduced a Direct Action climate change policy. There is absence of bipartisan agreement about the best long-term policy approach. This extended abstract provides some insights for future Australian climate change policy using the lessons provided from previous policies and international experience. Strategically, Australia would be well placed to consider how best to manage the risks associated with potential substitution of coal and gas in power generation globally, given the strategic importance of these export industries for Australia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.278
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.030 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe APPEA JournalSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207