MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981784473 · doi:10.3917/crii.036.0037

Crises extrêmes et institutionnalisation du droit pénal international

2007· article· fr· W1981784473 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Schoenfeld, Ron Levi, John Hagan

Bibliographic record

VenueCritique internationale · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme Crises and the Institutionalization of International Criminal Law The end of the Cold War has brought an increased legalization of the international sphere, particularly through the field of international criminal law. We examine how law has enjoyed this dominance through an institutional biography of the International Criminal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). We find that through its own survival strategies, the Tribunal’s trajectory generated symbolic and material capital that is securing a broader institutionalization of international criminal law. We demonstrate how innovations within the ICTY produced new resources and legal tools, and formed a professional class of international civil servants who are going on to legitimate and extend these tools in other venues. As a result, the field is gaining a foothold despite a recent loss in momentum of the ICTY itself. Consonant with the broader valuation of symbolic goods, we conclude that the legalization of the international works through a logic of deferred accomplishments, in which short-term losses are part of a gamble for securing institutional longevity. As a result, efforts to have law dominate the international may be winning even when they appear to lose.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.022
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritique internationaleSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207