Response to Newfoundland & Labrador Public Discussion Document “Climate Change: Responding to Climate Change \nin Newfoundland & Labrador”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The international scientific community considers climate change to be one of the greatest threats of our \ntime and to limit the very worst consequences of this problem, the global community must reduce \ncarbon emissions steeply and immediately. Newfoundland and Labrador is already experiencing climate \nchange impacts and the province has a responsibility to act given its major fossil fuel industry. This \nchallenge also represents an opportunity for Newfoundland and Labrador to become a leader in \naddressing climate change in Canada. \nThe province has taken important first steps and this document outlines some of the next key policy \ndirections available to the province to reduce carbon emissions. \n#1. Set emissions reduction targets that respect the scientific consensus and Canada’s \ninternational commitments. \n#2. Put a fair price on carbon emissions. Provide market signals to encourage emission \nreductions via a cap and trade system. As a national or regional cap and trade system develops, \nimplement a carbon tax. \n#3. Facilitate the transition to a renewable energy economy by investing in sustainable, “green” \nenergy research and technology and by requiring energy efficiency standards. \n#4. Reduce energy demand through, for example, addressing the building code and vehicle \nstandards and investing in public and alternative transit. \n#5. Integrate climate change considerations into land-use planning across the sectors. \n5.1. Forestry: target climate change forest research and focus on broadening current \nforest management strategies. \n5.2. Peatlands: integrate peatland carbon sequestration and storage dynamics into land \nuse policy decisions. This includes trade-offs to be made between GHG mitigation and \nother policy sectors (food security, energy, economic). \n5.3. Water resources: increase monitoring of ground and surface water interactions to \nsupport the water needs of natural and managed ecosystems. \n5.4. Agriculture: increase research and education to facilitate adaptation and enhance \nagricultural productivity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 0.027 |
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".