Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regional initiatives relevant to Arctic environmental protection in the past year occurred mainly through the Arctic Council. Senior Arctic Officials (SAOs) held a virtual plenary meeting in November and convened a webinar series on marine cooperation from 29 September to 29 October. The Council’s six working groups continued with their cooperative projects and publications. Documentation from the SAOs and working group meetings may be found on the Council’s website (<http://www.arctic-council.org>). International activities of further note occurred in other venues. These activities include: advancing implementation of the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean; working through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to further address Arctic shipping issues; and promoting environmental cooperation through the Barents Euro-Arctic Council. A plenary meeting of SAOs was held virtually on 17–19 November in Reykjavik, Iceland, because of pandemic travel restrictions. Besides receiving summary progress reports from the Council’s six working groups, the SAOs received an update on efforts by the Expert Group on Black Carbon and Methane to compile a third report summarizing progress in reducing black carbon and methane emissions and recommending enhanced policy actions. The report, which is expected to be delivered to the Reykjavik ministerial meeting in May 2021, will set priorities for emission reductions from various sources including stationary and diesel-powered facilities, oil and gas, residential combustion, solid waste, agriculture and animal husbandry, and the management of wildfires.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".