Diplomacy and environment; conflict of interest or need for a legal regime?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, environmental protection and sustainable development are two fundamental pillars of human existence. In this process, the major roles are played by governments and international organizations. Adherence to international obligations (Erga Omnes) and Jus Cogens are two important rudiments in environmental diplomacy towards sustainable development. Surely, sustainability in development and Environmental protection would not have happened without serious regional interactions and international cooperation. In addition, sustainable development and development sustainability is not on their accurate path except in international interactions and global peace. Along with that, environmental diplomacy is known as an effective method of natural resources and ecosystem conservation. So, environmental discussions are very much important international convergence reason. Therefore, the international community can lead to global environmental conservation strategies with that convergence attitude. This research aims to determine the international environmental law evolution firstly and government’s roles in front of environmental challenges lying international convergence and legal fundamentals. So, environmental threats and hazards, display an illogical human act, that can be solved under the shadow of international convergence and moving to environmental conservation and global peace.
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 | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".