MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982808329 · doi:10.1163/15718085-12341332

Recent Framework Agreements for the Recognition and Development of Transboundary Hydrocarbon Resources

2014· article· en· W1982808329 on OpenAlex
Nigel Bankes

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

VenueThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStraddleNegotiationInternational lawLaw of the seaMaritime boundarySet (abstract data type)BusinessInternational tradePolitical scienceComputer sciencePublic international lawLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrocarbon accumulations straddle international boundaries and maritime zones. Historically states dealt with this reality by negotiating unity-of-deposit clauses in maritime delimitation agreements, followed by specific agreements upon the discovery of a straddling deposit. A more recent trend is to negotiate framework agreements which are designed to put in place a set of procedures for dealing with the discovery and exploitation of transboundary hydrocarbon resources. This paper examines selected aspects of five recent framework agreements.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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