Réduire les émissions par l’adoption de modes de transport durable et par l’aménagement viable du territoire : une solution en parallèle de la CCNUCC?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La 16 e Conférence des Parties de la CCNUCC a permis d'observer la faible place accordée aux enjeux de transports et d'aménagement urbain dans les textes de négociation sur les changements climatiques.Jusqu'à maintenant, seul 0,4 % des projets concernant les mécanismes de développement propre (MDP) proviennent du secteur des transports parce que les exigences ne siéent pas à celui-ci.L'alternative la plus complète est soutenue, depuis 2008, par le regroupement Bridging the Gap.Leur proposition établit les critères de mise en place de Mesures d'atténuation appropriées au niveau national (MAAN) qui incluraient les transports durables et l'aménagement urbain.Elle inclut les mesures de financement et de renforcement des capacités des pays en développement pour mener à bien lesdites MAAN.Ce rapport propose l'analyse d'un secteur clé dans la lutte aux changements climatiques.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".