MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116250257

International Cooperation in Protection of Atmospheric Ozone: The Montreal Protocol on Substancese That Deplete the Ozone Layer

2020· article· en· W3116250257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bryce Blegen

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - DU (University of Denver) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolOzone layerOzoneAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyLayer (electronics)Ozone depletionChemistryGeographyGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

countries signed a landmark Protocol' to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 2 thereby taking a large step toward solution of the global environmental problem posed by the depletion of atmospheric ozone.The importance of this Protocol is two-fold: it serves to reduce the production of pollutants responsible for atmospheric ozone destruction, and it represents a milestone in the field of international environmental cooperation-it is the first time the international community has banded together to eliminate an environmental threat before serious damage has occured.As such, the Protocol might help set a precedent for solving other environmental challenges faced by the global community.By focusing on both these aspects of the Protocol, this article will attempt to provide a thorough analysis of the ozone problem.After a summary of the scientific background of the current threat to atmospheric ozone, the article will discuss the Protocol's historical background, analyze its provisions, and highlight its significance for the field of international environmental law in general.It is hoped that this discussion will serve to demonstrate just how unique and revolutionary the Protocol is, as well as emphasize the scope and severity of the problem of atmospheric ozone depletion.1.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.795

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - DU (University of Denver)Same topicEnvironmental law and policyFrench-language works237,207