Bibliographic record
Abstract
Like few other commercial activities, an airline embodies the national symbol of the nation whose flag it flies. Its existence, its routes, and all of its commercial activities are a product of national oversight and regulation. For some nations, aviation is a symbol of national aspirations of pride, prestige, and global penetration.Moreover, commercial aviation disasters - intentional or accidental - are uniquely treated by the news media as singular events, commanding the front pages of newspapers, the cover stories of news magazines, and the lead stories of television news broadcasting and electronic media sites. For all these reasons, commercial aircraft have been prominent targets of terrorist attacks.Terrorism has become the nightmare of the modern world. The means by which terrorism manifests itself are as brutal as they are imaginative. They include hijacking aircraft, firing heat-seeking missiles at aircraft, bombing aircraft or airport lounges, gunning down passengers at airports, and more recently, turning aircraft into guided missiles aimed at financial and governmental institutions.Hijacking and other forms of aerial terrorism have developed as a means for the militarily weak to achieve political ends at the expense of the innocent. During the infancy of civil aviation, a passenger's principal concerns were the skill of the pilot and the condition of the aircraft. Recent decades have added a third concern: whether or not a fellow passenger intends to use the occasion to focus the media's attention on a revolutionary cause. The hijacking or destruction of aircraft is still among the most effective means of capturing a worldwide audience.Hijackings account for the largest percentage of all attacks against civil aviation. Other criminal acts include: (1) airport attacks;7 (2) bombings, attempted bombings, and shootings on board civil aviation aircraft; (3) general and charter aviation aircraft incidents; (4) off-airport facility attacks; and (5) shootings at inflight aircraft.This Article reviews how international and domestic laws have worked in a complimentary fashion to arrest aircraft hijacking, piracy, terrorism, and other forms of unlawful interference with commercial aviation. Part II examines the international resolutions and conventions on aerial terrorism, and Part III analyzes United States legislation. The discussion proceeds across time in order to facilitate a chronological understanding of the evolution of law and policy in aviation, which is particularly important because the development of aviation policy has long been a reactive, rather than a proactive, process. Neither international nor domestic law will effectively deter aerial terrorism without worldwide cooperation to strengthen airport and aircraft security, prosecute terrorists, and impose meaningful sanctions on states that provide safe havens for, or support, hijackers and other aerial terrorists.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.055 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".