MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996049186

A quantitative comparison and analysis on the assessment indicators of greenhouse gases emission

2008· other· en· W6996049186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venue中国科学院文献情报中心机构知识库 (Chinese Academy of Sciences) · 2008
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasPer capitaGlobal warmingDeveloping countryDeveloped countryTrend analysisEmission intensityGreenhouse effect
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) emission and related global warming issues have been the focus of international communities for some time. The international communities have reached a consensus to reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions and restrain global warming. The quantitative assessment of anthropogenic GHG emissions is the scientific basis to find out the status of global GHG emission, identify the commitments of each country, and arrange the international efforts of GHG emission reduction. Currently the main assessment indicators for GHG emission include national indicator, per capita indicator, per GDP indicator, and international trade indicator etc. The introduction to the above indicators is put forward and their merits and demerits are analyzed. Based on the GHG emission data from the World Resource Institute (WRI), the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), and the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC), the results of each indictor are calculated for the world, for the eight G8 industrialized countries (USA, UK, Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Italy and Russia), and the five major developing countries including China, Brazil, India, South Africa and Mexico. The paper points out that all these indicators have some limitations. The Indicator of Industrialized Accumulative Emission per Capita (IAEC) is put forward as the equitable indicator to evaluate the industrialized historical accumulative emission per capita of every country. IAEC indicator can reflect the economic achievement of GHG emission enjoyed by the current generations in every country and their commitments. The analysis of IAEC indicates that the historical accumulative emission per capita in industrialized countries such as UK and USA were typically higher than those of the world average and the developing countries. Emission indicator per capita per GDP, consumptive emission indicator and survival emission indicator are also put forward and discussed in the paper.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue中国科学院文献情报中心机构知识库 (Chinese Academy of Sciences)French-language works237,207