MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386806612 · doi:10.1002/wwp2.12142

Exploring groundwater–climate change interactions: A critical review of <i>Groundwater and Climate Change: Multi‐Level Law and Policy Perspectives</i> by Philippe Cullet

2023· review· en· W4386806612 on OpenAlexaff
Kulsum Fatima

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Water Policy · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeSustainabilityContext (archaeology)GroundwaterEnvironmental planningNatural resource economicsEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEconomicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, climate change has gained much attention worldwide, emphasizing the need to find sustainable solutions to protect the planet's resources. One of the primary resources affected by climate change is groundwater, a vital source of freshwater for agriculture and domestic use worldwide. In his book Groundwater and Climate Change: Multi‐Level Law and Policy Perspectives , Philippe Cullet discusses the complex relationship between groundwater and climate change and its legal and policy implications at various levels of interventions. Cullet's book provides comprehensive insights into the legal and governance frameworks needed to protect and sustainably manage groundwater in the face of climate change. This book review will examine the key arguments presented by Cullet, providing a critical analysis of the book's contribution to the field of environmental law and policy. It aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the legal and policy framework related to groundwater management in the context of climate change with a special focus on interaction between climate change and groundwater lessons in Indian context.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.238
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Water PolicySame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207