MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770348997 · doi:10.22158/asir.v1n2p131

Socio-Economic Determinism and Climate Change

2017· article· en· W2770348997 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Science and Innovative Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaClimate changeGovernment (linguistics)Psychological resilienceGlobal warmingEconomyDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceGeographyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><em>The global warming problematic is in reality decided not by the UNFCCC or IPCC with its mastodon meetings. The decisive players are the states of the following BIG polluters of CO2: China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Russia Mexico, South Korea, Canada, Australia and the US, despite the fact that its present government already has defected from the common pool regime, set up in Paris 2017, These countries together with international shipping and aviation are putting out more than 50% of the CO2s. However, they are little interested, because they emphasize the policy-making of socio-economic development, either economic growth with rich countries or the “catch-up” strategy with poor or emerging economies. Resilience will decide which countries can support the consequences of climate change.</em></p>

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.419
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.005 · 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