Importance and Impact of International Agreements or Protocols to Protect Ozone and Beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synchronized control of both global warming and ozone depletion is prerequisite for the sustainable stability of our bio-diversity. Here we uncover the importance of Paris Agreement and Kyoto Protocol and the new impact of Montreal Protocol to protect stratospheric ozone by considering the prototype H₂O + O(¹D) → 2OH insertion/addition reaction as the representative reaction of potent GHG molecules with steady state O(¹D). While CO₂ via its continuous regeneration CO₂ + O(¹D) → CO₂ + O(³P) reaction in stratosphere is involved in ozone hole formation, the geoengineering via nonstop CaCO₃ injections in stratosphere in future would also be responsible for ozone hole formation. Moreover, the classical nature of single potential wells of single step exothermic barrierless reactions governed by quantum mechanics de-energizes the energized adducts or products analogous to energy conservation of a falling mass from some height under gravity and plays decisive role in the extent of pressure independency of rate constants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".