MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518525053 · doi:10.7202/1069174ar

LE RÔLE DU TRIBUNAL INTERNATIONAL DU DROIT DE LA MER DANS LA PROTECTION DU MILIEU MARIN

2020· article· fr· W1518525053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christophe Nouzha

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceTribunalPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au moment où le Tribunal international du droit de la mer fête le dixième anniversaire de sa mise en place, il peut être intéressant de se pencher sur son rôle dans le domaine de la protection du milieu marin. Amené à appliquer et à interpréter un instrument, la Convention des Nations unies sur le droit de la mer , dans lequel l’environnement occupe une place de première importance, la contribution du Tribunal est d’abord fonction de l’étendue de sa juridiction et de l’utilisation qui en est faite par ceux qui peuvent le saisir. Bien que l’activité du tribunal soit encore modeste, il n’en a pas moins eu l’occasion, à plusieurs reprises, d’affirmer et de développer certains principes de droit international de l’environnement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de droit internationalSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207