Still No Time for Complacency: Evaluating the Ongoing Success and Continued Challenge of Global Ozone Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article concludes the special issue by outlining the most important indicators of the ozone regime’s success as well as issues that could slow or even prevent the complete restoration of the Earth’s protective “ozone layer” or lead to new causes of depletion in the future. Evidence for the ozone regime’s success includes the following: the declining production and consumption of ozone-depleting substance (ODS) chemicals; declining levels of ODS in the atmosphere; reduced depletion of stratospheric ozone; the projected recovery of the ozone layer during this century; reduced UV radiation and the associated environmental, human health, and economic benefits; universal participation in the regime’s treaties; the operation of regime institutions; and the regime’s ancillary success in reducing certain greenhouse gas emissions. Despite these historic successes, global ozone policy faces important challenges. These include the following: the millions of tons of ODS that remain in existing and discarded equipment and materials; the potential difficulty of completing the hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) phaseout; the broad exemptions that allow for the continued use of methyl bromide; the potential for illegal production and trade; the possibility that new ODS not covered by the regime have or will emerge; and the impacts of climate change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".