MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W106110683

AVIATION SECURITY: THE ROLE OF LAW IN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM

2003· article· en· W106110683 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismCommercial aviationAirport securityAviationCivil aviationPolitical scienceNational securityLawAviation safetyPoliticsNewspaperEngineeringAdvertisingBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.251 · 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