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
The Montreal Protocol has had great success in reducing the production and use of a number of known ozone depleting substances. As a result many alternatives to the banned substances have been developed. Some of these substances have, however, themselves ozone depleting properties or can be hazardous to the environment in other ways. As the procedure for including new ozone depleting substances under the regulation of the Montreal protocol is rather time consuming the parties to the Montreal Protocol have decided to encourage parties to take measures to actively discourage the production and marketing of new ozone depleting substances. Further it was decided to request parties to report to the ozone secretariat on new substances. EU has taken the effort to elaborate a table of 'New substances with ozone depletion potential'.Based on this list a shorter list of 7 substances of concern has been prepared by the Nordic Ozone Group for assessment in this study. The overall objective of the study is to contribute to the work on the protection of the ozone layer eventually by providing information which would facilitate the inclusion of new substances under the Montreal Protocol or by otherwise reducing the use of these substances if appropriate.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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