Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of this double issue of Global Energy Law and Sustainability is the implementation and fleshing out of Net Zero policies.Targets have been set, plans have been made and much has been said.For some, too much said, and too little done.Yet, it is now clear that many governments, legislatures and regulators around the globe are taking serious steps to tackle the specific challenges these commitments entail.From the US Inflation Reduction Act to a swathe of measures taken by the European Union, and many other, less wellknown, measures taken by large and small nations from India to Canada and Australia to Morocco, action on Net Zero has been evident.Often, it has been startling in its vigour and innovation.Yet these actions are being shaped by a geopolitical climate that is very different from that of 2015 when nearly 200 states signed up to the Paris Agreement.To a greater or lesser extent, they are influenced by the elevation of energy security to the top rank of the public policy agenda.Rarely, has it ever occupied such a pole position.Its early impacts have been subject to very different kinds of interpretation.For some, the short-term measures taken by certain governments to address shortages, actual or perceived, and price hikes, all too real for many citizens, have indicated a departure from the Net Zero commitments that the same governments entered into.Indeed, a few of these measuressuch as the conclusion of long-term natural gas contractsare likely to have effects that embed fossil fuels in their economies for many years ahead, giving support to such a view.Others, however, have noted how the largely domestic base of renewable energy supplies has given it an advantage in a context of government anxiety about import dependence.Experts, including the OECD's International Energy Agency, have been optimistic about the medium to long term shift towards cleaner energy.
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 | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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.
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".