Développements récents du droit international relatif a la biodiversité marine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les océans couvrent 70% de la surface du globe et représentent le plus important réservoir en biodiversité. Même si nos connaissances demeurent lacunaires, il existe un consensus global quant à la nécessité de préserver la biodiversité marine. Toutefois, le droit privilégie encore l’exploitation, souvent irrationnelle, de ses éléments et notamment celle de ses ressources génétiques. La Convention des Nations unies sur le droit de la mer et la Convention sur la Diversité Biologique témoignent de cette tendance et révèlent toute la difficulté d’appréhender la spécificité du milieu marin, tant du point de vue physique que juridique. Malgré leurs insuffisances, ces deux « forums » ont tout de même le mérite de réunir une grande partie de la communauté internationale et favorisent la discussion entre les différents acteurs impliqués dans l’exploitation et la protection de la biodiversité marine.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".