Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
agreements 258-9 drivers, and need for biological remedies 366-82 emissions as economic externalities 36, 47, 48, 369, 389 as international common concern 367-9 internationally agreed standards, lack of 241 long-range transboundary 33-5 LRTAP see Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution and marine pollution, UNCLOS 152-3 multilateral regulatory regimes 33-5, 256-9 technology and operating techniques, adapting to changing 241-2 transboundary pollution, principles, policy and practice 33-5, 38-42 US-Canada Air Quality Agreement 234, 241, 256, 280, 373 see also ASEAN cooperation against transboundary air pollution; ASEAN Haze Agreement (2002); haze air pollution, Aerial Spraying (Ecuador v Colombia) 11-12, 235-56 Aarhus Convention 255 Deep Water Horizon Incident comparison 239-40 due diligence, importance of 236-43 environmental impact assessment (EIA) 245-8, 253 extraterritorial application 251-3 filing, effectiveness of 236 harm assessment 248-50 human rights cases, comparison with 242-3 human rights law application 248-55 lex specialis principle 250-51 management plan, lack of enforcement of 236-7 precautionary approach 196, 243-5 precautionary approach, avoidance of known risk 245 proof of harm, problems with 16, 21, 244 regulatory approach and failures 241-2 sovereignty violation 193 State obligation 237-8 victims falling within jurisdiction of polluting State 253-5 airpocalypse (WHO) 396-8 Albania, Corfu Channel (UK v Albania)
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.074 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".