MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977119396 · doi:10.1163/157181012x638061

The Exclusionary Boundary of the Early Modern International Community

2012· article· en· W1977119396 on OpenAlexaff
William E. Conklin

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Journal of International Law · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational lawReferentInternational communityCharacter (mathematics)LawUniversality (dynamical systems)HegelianismSociologyPolitical sciencePublic international lawPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an effort to gain a deeper understanding of an important referent of contemporary international law, the international community as a whole, this article retrieves four senses of such a community as elaborated by early modern European jurists: the Christendom highlighted by Thomas Aquinas and William of Ockham, the community constituted from customary norms as featured by Vitoria, Jean Bodin, Suárez, and Grotius, Kant’s “league of nations”, and Hegel’s “world history”. The shared theme of each sense of an international community is that, despite the universality attributed to the community, some societies are excluded from recognition and membership. This exclusionary character of the international community raises the question whether a sense of an international community is emerging which overcomes the problems leading to such an exclusionary character.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.050
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.006
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNordic Journal of International LawSame topicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207