MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296122270 · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(22)00222-4

Why we need a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty

2022· article· en· W4296122270 on OpenAlexaff
Courtney Howard, Jess Beagley, Mohamed Eissa, Ojistoh Horn, Jennifer Kuhl, Jeni Miller, S. P. Atul Narayan, Richard Smith, Willow Thickson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Planetary Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyFossil fuelInternational tradeBusinessPolitical scienceBiologyEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deaths from heat waves, hospital evacuations due to floods and wildfires, asthma exacerbations from heat-amplified air pollution, drought-related malnutrition emergencies, changing patterns of infectious disease—every year it becomes clearer why pollution and climate change are the greatest threats to health and health systems of our time. Many health benefits are expected if average global temperature is kept closer to 1·5oC than 2oC above preindustrial levels.1 Concerningly, in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (working group 1) Assessment Report only the lowest emissions scenario shows temperatures staying below 1·5oC, and this is only after a brief period of overshoot.

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)0.001
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 score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Planetary HealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207