MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7146696213

地球温暖化問題に関する国際交渉―適応策を中心として―

2007· article· ja· W7146696213 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Izumi Kubota

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change, Adaptation, Migration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Conference of the partiesClimate changeKyoto ProtocolUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeConventionSustainable development
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 11th session and the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol at its first session (2005), at Montreal, signified a successful start into a new era of international climate policy. Much literature has been published offering proposals on what should be done with a post-2012 regime. Most of them mention the importance of enhancing adaptation policy. Adaptation as a strategy to cope with impact of climate change is increasingly the focus of policy action at each level. Developing countries, including Small Islands Developing States, urge to amplify the adaptation policy in the UNFCCC framework. It has been indicated the needs for an international mechanism for assisting the Parties to adapt to climate change at local level suitable to their sustainable development strategy. This article summarizes concepts of adaptation and adaptive capacity in the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, introduces treatments of adaptation in the UNFCCC and the Kyoto protocol, and shows proposals on adaptation policy options in the future regime. Finally it presents the points at issue on adaptation policy for discussing post-2012 framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicClimate Change, Adaptation, MigrationFrench-language works237,207