MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127742672 · doi:10.3386/w28442

Solar Geoengineering, Learning, and Experimentation

2021· report· en· W3127742672 on OpenAlex
David L. Kelly, Garth Heutel, Juan Moreno‐Cruz, Soheil Shayegh

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2021
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoengineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceClimate changeBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar geoengineering (SGE) can combat climate change by directly reducing temperatures. Both SGE and the climate itself are surrounded by great uncertainties. Implementing SGE affects learning about these uncertainties. We model endogenous learning over two uncertainties: the sensitivity of temperatures to carbon concentrations (the climate sensitivity), and the effectiveness of SGE in lowering temperatures. We present both theoretical and simulation results from an integrated assessment model, focusing on the informational value of SGE experimentation. Surprisingly, under current calibrated conditions, SGE deployment slows learning, causing a less informed decision. For any reasonably sized experimental SGE deployment, the temperature change becomes closer to zero, and thus more obscured by noisy weather shocks. Still, some SGE use is optimal despite, not because of, its informational value. The optimal amount of SGE is very sensitive to beliefs about both uncertainties.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0060.000

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.214 · 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