Study of International Regulatory Co-operation (IRC) arrangements for air quality
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China, Japan and Korea have deployed a multiplicity of co-operation efforts at different levels of government to promote air quality and curb transboundary pollution. This paper identifies the existing arrangements for air quality co-operation in North East Asia and provides guidance to advance the co-operation required to face cross-border air pollution building on the experience of two long-standing co-operative agreements in this area: the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement and UNECE’s Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. This paper finds that the multilateral arrangements existent in North East Asia are yet to produce a comprehensive science-based regional approach to address transboundary air pollution. Key suggestions for countries to capitalise on the stronger momentum for co-operation in this area include: i) building on the existing frameworks for international regulatory co-operation for air quality; ii) advancing a common understanding of transboundary air pollution across scientific regional arrangements; and iii) strengthening the domestic policy frameworks for air quality in each country as a key prerequisite.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it