MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1613069042 · doi:10.1089/space.2015.0003

Legal Considerations for Commercial Space: An Overview

2015· article· en· W1613069042 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

VenueNew Space · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace lawSpace (punctuation)Relevance (law)LawCommercial lawInternational lawPolitical scienceOuter spaceSpace industryBusinessLaw and economicsSociologyComputer scienceCommercialization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article provides a basic overview of the legal and regulatory obstacles facing new entrants to the commercial space industry. It is meant to provide access to the essential primary sources of space law for those who wish to learn more about the direct relevance of space law to space business. This high-level review of space law is intended to provide a picture of the reach and complexity of space law (as well as its overlap with other fields of law). The interconnections between international law and national law/regulations are highly emphasized. The article begins with a summary of the key provisions of the Outer Space Treaty, including commentary meant to assist commercial actors to ascertain the relevance of each such provision to their business model. It then leads into a brief discussion of other international space law instruments such as the other four COPUOS treaties and relevant International Telecommunications Union instruments. The discussion of national space law focuses on the United States, as a state with significant space activities and well-developed laws and regulations for commercial space actors.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.218 · 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