MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4379660675 · doi:10.17520/biods.2022588

Convention on Biological Diversity and its protocols: Negotiation, challenges and recommendations on the “capacity-building and development”

2023· article· en· W4379660675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dini Zhang, Lei Wang, Xiaoqiang Lu, Changyong Wang, Yan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Environmental Law and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvention on Biological DiversityNegotiationDiversity (politics)Capacity buildingCapacity developmentConference of the partiesConventionEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceBusinessBiodiversityEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

摘要: 能力建设与发展一直是《生物多样性公约》(以下简称《公约》)及其议定书下的重要议题, 《昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物 多样性框架》更是将其作为履约的有效执行手段之一。本文旨在增进生物多样性利益相关方对能力建设与发展问题的全面、 深入理解, 以及探讨为处理这个问题可选择的优先政策事项。首先, 从能力、能力建设和能力发展基本概念入手, 概述了这 些术语在《公约》及其议定书相关文件中的演变历史; 然后, 基于历届《公约》及其议定书的决定, 全面梳理了能力建设与 发展的磋商进程和COP15主要争论焦点, 分析了该领域面临的资金、规划、项目、信息分享以及与其他国际公约之间的协同 等关键性挑战及其原因

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.141
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1410.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.023
Scholarly communication0.0180.016
Open science0.0100.010
Research integrity0.0190.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.125 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Science→Same topicInternational Environmental Law and Policies→French-language works237,207→