From NDC to national long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategies compatible with a 2 °C target
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the lack of collective ambition resulting from the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the objective ofthe Paris Agreement, countries must submit revised and more ambitious NDCs. Countries are invited to formulate longtermlow greenhouse gas emission development strategies that should be designed within the context of otherdevelopment goals and co-benefits. This article addresses the issues related to the evaluation of national trajectoriesdeveloped in a cooperative framework aiming at collectively reaching 2°C and based on the integration of developmentpriorities and co-benefits into national trajectories. The national decarbonization trajectories discussed in this articlewere developed as part of the Deep Decarbonization Pathway Project (DDPP) by the 16 major GHG emitting countries.These 16 bottom-up decarbonization strategies are implemented in the POLES model, a partial equilibrium model of theglobal energy sector, which is an appropriate tool to provide a harmonized contextual framework for assessing thesetrajectories. The results make it possible to evaluate the gap between, on the one hand, national DDPP trajectories andNDCs and, on the other hand, national DDPP trajectories and a scenario resulting from a minimization of abatement costs.They allow to feed a discussion on the development of NDCs and the move away from national trajectories of trajectoriesminimizing the overall reduction cost and produced with integrated assessment models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".