MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035099536 · doi:10.2800/16180

Fluorinated greenhouse gases 2018: data reported by companies on the production, import and export of fluorinated greenhouse gases in the European Union, 2007-2017

2018· article· en· W3035099536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eea

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Policies and Emissions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEuropean unionEnvironmental scienceTonneGlobal-warming potentialGreenhouse gas removalGlobal warmingMontreal ProtocolAgency (philosophy)Production (economics)Natural resource economicsKyoto ProtocolCarbon dioxideEnvironmental protectionClimate changeWaste managementBusinessClimate change mitigationInternational tradeEngineeringChemistryMeteorologyOzone layerEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2018 edition of the European Environment Agency (EEA) report on fluorinated greenhouse gases (F-gases) confirms the good progress achieved in 2017 by the European Union (EU) in phasing down the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a set of fluorinated gases with a high global warming potential (GWP) that is significantly contributing to climate change. The report evaluates and presents the data reported by companies in 2018 about their activities involving F-gases in 2017, assessing both the progress made under the ongoing EU-wide HFC phase-down and the outlook towards the global HFC phase-down, which is due to begin in 2019 under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol. The report also details the amounts of F-gases supplied to different industrial applications. The report uses two different metrics: F-gas amounts expressed in physical tonnes reflect the use patterns of F-gases in European industries, while their GWP (in tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents (tCO2e)) are relevant for climate change policy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental Policies and EmissionsFrench-language works237,207