MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1929171635

Transnational Liftoff and Juridical Touchdown: The Regulatory Function of Private International Law in an Era of Globalization

2002· article· en· W1929171635 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Wai

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGlobalizationConflict of lawsInternationalizationInternational lawParochialismPrivate lawCommercial lawPolitical scienceComparative lawLaw and economicsFunction (biology)LawEconomicsInternational trade
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalization is sometimes considered to have led to the liftoff of international business transactions from national regulatory oversight. This Article is concerned with the connection between a liftoff of transnational business processes and the laws related to international economic transactions. In particular, the Article examines the "governing" role that national private laws play in transnational business relations through an examination of the regulatory function of private international law.The Article describes how recent "internationalist" reforms in private international law contribute to a possible liftoff and discusses representative policy justifications for these reforms, such as the facilitation of international commerce, the attainment of interstate cooperation, and the promotion of cosmopolitan fairness to parties. It then explores reasons why the traditional regulatory function of private international law has been obscured in recent internationalist reform, in particular by its ready, if misleading, identification with parochialism. To address such concerns, the Article describes a cosmopolitan account of the regulatory function of private international law in the contemporary era of globalization. It identifies the nature of the regulatory challenges that face private international law in the current international system and makes proposals for the kinds of regulatory role that private international law could play in the constitution of a pluralistic system of governance that might address some of the excesses of economic globalization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.062
Scholarly communication0.0160.013
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations89
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207