MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980245119 · doi:10.1093/jel/eqm032

Trail Smelter II: Transnational Application of CERCLA

2007· article· en· W1980245119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gerrit Betlem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Law · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiabilityJurisdictionHarmDamagesLawArbitrationEnforcementBusinessEnvironmental protectionPolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transboundary pollution—Environmental liability—CERCLA—Extraterritoriality—Jurisdiction—Citizen suits—Transnational enforcement—EU Environmental Liability Directive—EU ‘Rome II’ Regulation Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals Ltd ., 452 F.3rd 1066 (9th Cir. 2006) The most famous case about transboundary pollution in public international law is known as Trail Smelter . 1 The case concerns a Canadian lead-zinc smelter in Trail, British Columbia, close to the US border with the State of Washington, causing environmental damage in the latter as a result of air pollution. Arbitration at the interstate level took place and the principles of international law about states’ obligations to prevent transboundary harm were clarified. States must not use or permit the use of their territory where serious injury is caused to another state in breach of its obligations; the source state is responsible in international law in damages and must prevent future damage. 2 This all happened between 1925 and 1941. Subsequently and before, hazardous materials including...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0130.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental LawSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207