MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307166042 · doi:10.3233/epl-219043

The UNFCCC Regime at a Crossroads: Can You Trust Anyone Over 30?+

2022· article· en· W4307166042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Meinhard Doelle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Policy and Law · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionConference of the partiesPolitical scienceDiplomacyUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeState (computer science)Climate changeQuarter (Canadian coin)Political economyLawGeographySociologyComputer scienceEcologyKyoto ProtocolPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted in 1992. It was opened for signature at Rio de Janeiro in June of that year. The 30th anniversary of its adoption offers an opportunity to reflect on more than a quarter of a century of UN climate diplomacy, and to consider the path ahead. This contribution takes a look back at the choices made that have led the regime to its current state. It then takes a look forward and considers the prospects of the regime meeting its ultimate aim of avoiding dangerous human interference with the climate system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Policy and LawSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207