États fédérés et mise en œuvre des traités climatiques internationaux : le cas du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
États fédérés et mise en œuvre 608 des traités climatiques internationaux : (2011) 41 R.D.U.S. le cas du Québec États fédérés et mise en œuvre (2011) 41 R.D.U.S. des traités climatiques internationaux : 609 le cas du Québec 1.3 Révision des engagements (Deuxième période d'engagement) Article 9.1, 9.2 -Révision du Protocole Article 3.9 -Révision des engagements de réduction (AI) 2. Reddition de compte et transparence 2.1 Inventaires nationaux Article 5.1 -Système national Article 5.2, 5.3 -Méthodologie 2.2 Puits de carbone Article 3.4 -Inventaire initial (1990) 2.2 Communications nationales Article 7 -Communications nationales (conformément à l'art.12de la Convention) 3. Soutien et transferts aux pays en développement 3.1 Transferts technologiques Article 10c, 11.2b -Transferts de technologies, savoir-faire, pratiques et procédés 3.2 Renforcement des capacités Article 10e -Renforcement des capacités 3.3 Financement Article 11.2 -Fourniture de ressources financières nouvelles et additionnelles, prévisibles et adéquates États fédérés et mise en œ uvre (2011) 41 R.D.U.S. des traités climatiques internationaux : 625 le cas du Québec
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".