THE ITU TREATY NEGOTIATIONS: A CALL FOR OPENNESS AND PARTICIPATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is renegotiating its treaty with the 193 countries of the world, and it hopes to expand from the telecommunications arena into the Internet. However, there’s one major problem with this shift in mandate: The ITU is a closed organization and has been for nearly 150 years. The ITU’s rules and processes may have worked for the old state-run telecom monopolies, but they cannot work in regulating the Internet, where standards have been developed in an open manner since its inception. Thus, in order to gain legitimacy with the Internet community, the ITU will need to (1) open its processes for review and comment by civil society, academics, the private sector, and the public; (2) make its TIES database freely and publicly accessible for review and comment; and (3) allow multistakeholder participation in developing standards and protocols, particularly where other groups (like the IETF) are actively developing standards.
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 | 0.106 | 0.166 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.038 | 0.034 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.067 | 0.052 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".