MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602093689 · doi:10.7202/701073ar

Droit de la mer : La contribution du Canada au nouveau concept de la zone économique

2005· article· en· W1602093689 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Georges Antoine Léger

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExclusive economic zoneTerritorial watersMandatePolitical scienceUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaGeographyNegotiationInternational lawLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decade-long process of negotiation leading to a new regime of Oceans Law is drawing to a close. One of its major achievements to date is the elaboration of an entirely new concept in ocean space, the exclusive economic zone. Canada has played a leading role in bringing about consensus on the main elements of this zonal approach, a bridge linking certain features of the territorial sea regime with a number of safeguards derived from the exercise of high seas rights. Canada 's contribution was based generally on a novel application of the functional approach which has been prevalent in Canada 's treatment of Law of the Sea issues over the past few years. The idea was to apply the principles of delegation of powers to those of functionalism, in order to foster a zonal approach whereby certain functional rights and obligations (pertaining, for instance, to fisheries or to the marine environment) would be carried out by the coastal state on behalf of the international community. In recognition of its exercise of this mandate, and in regard to its geographical proximity to the ocean space it managed, the coastal state would be granted a preferential (and for most purposes an exclusive) access to the resources of the zone. One of the best examples of this approach can be found in Canada 's earliest efforts to deal with the fundamental issue of fishing rights at the Conference. Bringing a multi-disciplinary focus to bear on the need to distinguish between different species of fish in the coastal areas, the Canadian delegation, with the co-sponsorship of a number of like-minded countries, brought forward proposals tailored to the management and exploitation of these species.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207